Turning now to the third step, Mayfield once again bears the burden and must point to substantial evidence that Defendant's stated nondiscriminatory reason was pretextual. Cf. Edrich v. Dallas Coll., No. 3:21-CV-02963-E, 2023 WL 8606816, at *13 (N.D. Tex. Dec. 12, 2023) (requiring “substantial evidence” that the given reason for not hiring the plaintiff was pretextual to satisfy the third prong)). In this case, Mayfield's road to showing substantial evidence of pretext is complicated by two presumptions that no discriminatory motive was involved in the hiring decision.