“An employer may establish job requirements, and rely on them in arguing that a prima facie case is not established because the employee is not ‘qualified.’  However, only objective requirements may be used in making this argument.” Johnson v. Louisiana, 351 F.3d 616, 622 (5^th Cir. Nov. 14, 2003) (citing Medina v. Ramsey Steel Co., Inc., 238 F.3d 674, 681 (5th Cir. Jan. 21, 2001)).  “That is, an employer cannot defeat summary judgment at the prima facie stage by claiming the plaintiff failed to meet entirely subjective hiring criteria. Medina, 238 F.3d at 681. …. The police chief requirements at issue have objective and subjective elements.  The vacancy stated, in relevant part, that applicants ‘should have ten years of pertinent experience, including supervisory experience as a division commander, assistant police chief or police chief.’ Doc. [40–6].  While the number of years required is objective, it appears that the City may have been able to make a quasi-subjective determination on whether an applicant’s experience is ‘pertinent.’…. Plaintiff is able to show, and the City does not challenge, that he satisfies the objective hiring criteria for the position.  Such is demonstrated by Plaintiff’s resume and deposition testimony summarizing his work experience and qualifications.”

Harstad v. City of Columbus, Miss., 2014 WL 4913966, at *3–4 (N.D. Miss. Sept. 30, 2014) (Brown, J.).