Their decision was made by the time he walked to the chair in the interview room.
All else was simply show; a performance for the human resources and law department second-guessers so later it could be said that a full interview was given and all of the prescribed questions were asked.
The fact is he didn't fit their picture of a successful candidate. He was either too fat or too thin, too educated or not educated enough, too old or not quite old enough, or there was just something in his background or appearance that irked them. The reason's substance really didn't matter because they thought it had substance, the decision was theirs to make, and they'd never tell him the real reason because they weren't entirely sure themselves.
After the letter arrived announcing the decision, he would talk it over with his wife and friends and attempt to figure out where he'd fallen short. All of them would try to help, much as you might assist a person with the clue to a crossword puzzle. Perhaps it was this answer or maybe they wanted more of that particular knowledge.
The analysis would be sound but for one assumption: that the interviewers were behaving logically.