Rogers v. Bell Helicopter Text

*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion
should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances
set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-11048
Summary Calendar
KAREN ROGERS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
BELL HELICOPTER TEXTRON, INC.,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for
the Northern District of Texas
(USDC No. 3:99-CV-988-R)
_______________________________________________________
March 23, 2001
Before REAVLEY, DeMOSS and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Plaintiff Appellant Karen Rogers appeals the district court’s entry of summary
judgment for defendant Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. (Bell). Rogers failed to
provide medical certification for her leave within the fifteen-day minimum period

-- 1 of 2 --

2
established by the Family and Medical Leave Act, See 29 C.F.R. § 825.305(b)
(FMLA) and accordingly Bell did not violate the FMLA when it terminated her
pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Furthermore, nothing in the
record suggests that Rogers was terminated in retaliation for suing Bell under the
FMLA. Rogers was terminated because of her absences and sued Bell only after she
was terminated.
Affirmed.

-- 2 of 2 --