Moiseeff v. Daimlerchrysler Corp.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 05a0160n.06 Filed: March 2, 2005 No. 04-1042 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT IGOR MOISEEFF, ) ) ON APPEAL FROM THE Plaintiff-Appellant, ) UNITED STATES DISTRICT ) COURT FOR THE EASTERN v. ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN ) DAIMLERCHRYSLER CORPORATION, ) OPINION ) Defendant-Appellee. ) BEFORE: BATCHELDER, COLE, Circuit Judges, RUSSELL, District Judge* PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-Appellant Igor Moiseeff appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee DaimlerChrysler Corporation in this case brought pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”). 29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq. The district court found that Moiseeff did not establish a prima facie case of retaliation under the FMLA because he failed to show a causal connection between his FMLA-protected leave and his discharge. In the alternative, the court found that Moiseeff failed to show that DaimlerChrysler’s legitimate, non- discriminatory reason for discharge was pretextual. This Court reviews a district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo. McKay v. Toyota Motor Mfg., USA, Inc., 110 F.3d 369, 372 (6th Cir. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the parties’ submissions. For substantially the same reasons set forth in the district court’s * The Honorable Thomas B. Russell of the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky, sitting by designation. No. 04-1042 Moiseeff v. DaimlerChrysler comprehensive opinion dated November 21, 2003, we AFFIRM the grant of summary judgment. -2-