Given a new fact that Peterson did not have so many accidents and other safety violations, Peterson has met the requirements of a prima facie case. What is the next step in the analysis? a. There is nothing left. Once Peterson plaintiff provides a prima facie case, plaintiff wins. b. The burden shifts to Exide to provide evidence that they terminated Peterson for legitimate, nonretaliatory reasons. c. Peterson must now provide evidence that the Exide's reasoning for termination is pretextual. d. There is not enough information to what the next step should be in this case