What Was the Holding of the Appellate Court in Dixon

What was the holding of the appellate court in Dixon v. University of Toledo, the case in the text in which the plaintiff alleged a violation of the Equal Pay Act?

A) That the defendant was entitled to a judgment in its favor because a claim under the Equal Pay Act cannot be based on a male successor's pay rate.
B) That the defendant was entitled to a judgment in its favor because Title VII subsumed the provisions of the Equal Pay Act, and the plaintiff was required to name Title VII in her complaint.
C) That the defendant was entitled to a judgment in its favor because it established that the plaintiff was fired for cause.
D) That the plaintiff correctly made out her prima facie case by alleging the wage differential between her pay at termination and her successor's pay at the onset of his new position.
E) That the plaintiff correctly made out her prima facie case through establishing that there was no basis upon which her termination could be legally based and that the male successor was hired almost immediately following her termination.