Several bargaining unit employees of American Crystal Sugar's (ACS) facilities were participating in contract negotiations with ACS for a successor agreement. ACS made a final offer, which was rejected by the employees' union. ACS then locked out its bargaining-unit employees and transitioned to using replacement workers. When the unit employees applied for unemployment compensation, it was determined that the employees did not qualify for compensation because they were "unemployed due to a labor dispute." The unit employees appealed the decision, but the benefits denial was affirmed. The unit employees then requested that Job Service review the denial. This request was denied. Finally, the employees petitioned the district court for review of the benefits denial. Do you think the district court considered the lockout a "labor dispute" and thus affirmed the benefits denial? Why or why not? Olson v. Job Serv. N.D., 826 N.W.2d 36 (2013).