In two instances, Darden Restaurant did not hire applicants who were 52 and 49 years old, and instead hired many less experienced applicants outside the protected age group. Darden’s hiring officials told the unsuccessful applicants in the protected age group that they were too experienced, that they were looking for “fresh” employees and not “old white guys,” and that they wanted a “youthful image.” The EEOC alleged that a sampling of hiring data nationwide showed that Darden’s hiring of applicants in the protected age group was significantly below the expected hiring of applicants in that age groups based on the applications submitted to them and/or local Census data. Did these facts constitute a violation of the ADEA?