The United States age discrimination law protects individuals beginning at the age of 40. However, this law has specific requirements regarding whether an employer or the employee deter- mines whether age-related factors were involved with a termination or layoff. Prior to this case, the employer who let go an individual 40 years of age or more had the burden of saying the separation was based on a reasonable factor unrelated to age. However, during this case in 2008, 28 individuals at or above the age of 40 were laid off, and in turn sued the employer for age discrimination. These individuals argued that instead of the employer having the burden, and thus being able to argue that there was a reasonable factor unrelated to age, the individuals being let go should have the burden. This way, the individuals would then be able to argue in court that there was no "reasonable" factor other than age involved in the individuals' terminations from their jobs. In this case, did the Supreme Court agree with the individuals? Currently, who has the burden in such cases, the employer or the employees?