conclusion employees refused to investigate notably alan those were the only african american nursing instructor a faculty of about sixty four instructors remarkably in addition to your own memo which isn't the disputing of facts i have defendants proposed findings of fact with your handwriting on it with question marks in some handwritten notes that you really can't decipher is that what you're referring to that's exactly what i referring to a how on earth is a district court supposed to figure out based say i didn't say how can the district court look at this my question to you mr call was how can any court looking at this figure out what it is you're disputing your honor i just able to read those documents and post to figure that out based on your question mark handwritten on the side of defendants proposed your honor i think you know with all due respect you are grossly incorrect because well mr cole maybe you could help me figure it out then how my question is this is the document you're relying on as you have said to raise eighty nine disputed that how to this one well i don't know what you are looking at because when i put down i'm looking at what you filed in the district thank you good morning ma'am please the court this is their incorrect appearing on behalf of defendants apple e's sometimes it's hard to know where to begin so let me start i guess at the beginning this is a direct appeal from a summary judgment decision dismissing miss allen those race discrimination claims under title seven section one hundred and eighty one dollars and the equal protection clause as well as an alleged violation of the due process cla more than five years of state and federal proceedings pave the way to the district court's dismissal of mr allen mills claims against the college its board of directors in two individuals in their official capacity their original complaint allege forty two seven claims against six defendants nearly half of which failed right out of the gate because they were state law claims clearly preempted by wisconsin law only eight of the original forty two dollars claims survived the motion to  then on the dispositive motion deadline which came almost one year to the day after she filed her complaint with val in the filed a motion to compel claiming that she didn't have enough time to conduct discovery did her court court rightfully rejected the motion to compel an granted summary judgment to madison college the district court had more than enough reason to dismiss her claims on summary judgment as the court's aware the record was voluminous the facts were overwhelmingly in madison college provided a thoughtful analysis ultimately concluding that was no evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that miss allen all suffered any adverse employment action because of either her race or her previous complaints of discrimination this finding should be affirmed because the critical undisputed facts demonstrated that madison college had several good reasons for monitoring her performance placing her on performance improvement plans and ultimately recommending non renewa she had serious performance issues all well documented touching every facet every job madison college wanted to help it tried to help but to no avail gave her numerous chances including a new clinical sites a new mentor multiple performance improvement plans but she outright refused she refused even though she admitted at deposition that madison colleges expectations were reasonable that she was not meeting those legitimate expectations and she didn't take the performance improvement plan seriously when it became clear that she wasn't going to do anything to address her performance deficiencies she was recommended for non renewal in a process governed by wisconsin statute section one hundred and eight point two four the board of madison college decided to not renew her contract ms allen all never took responsibility for her port job performance instead she dug in her heels casting blame on everyone but herself by resorting to baseless claims of race criminalization for it investigating the dressed appropriately just a court properly concluded that no reasonable jury could find pretext on these facts in the standard for pretext of hi it means the reasons for her non renewal were alive made up had no basis in fact allen only afeard speculation and speculation alone does not establish pretext nor will pretext be found or the decision maker holds an honest belief for the reason it offers and here the record demonstrating her failures as a teacher was simply overwhelming this leaves her procedural due process claims against the laotian carolyn stoner which didn't survive summary judgment because she did not have a proper scuse me property interest in continued employment there certainly wasn't a ten year program at madison was unable to produce sufficient evidence to establish key elements of any of her claims let's turn to the district court discretionary finding starting with this decision to require compliance with local rules and summary judgment now it's important to note that to get your court did not have to find madison colleges proposed findings of fact and disputed to grant summary judgment in its favor nevertheless it acted well within its stressed discretion to do so there is absolutely no dispute  instead she submitted a photocopy of madison college's proposed findings of fact with some underlining question marks legible notations in the margins submitted her own undated declaration which largely contradicted her own prior sworn of exhibits through an affidavit of counsel still no proposed findings of fact of her own in its decision the district court remarked that alan ball did not provide a coherent or meaningful response to any of defendant's proposed findings of fact and as a result it accepted most a madison college's proposed findings of fact as undisputed this discretionary decision by the district court was without question reasonable and sound as for the district courts denial those decisions are generally upheld as a matter of routine it hardly bears much time and attention but it's worth briefly looking at what happened here st look in the record see what miss eleanor filed a sixteen page hodgepodge  baseless accusations and perfunctory and generally incoherent argument then look at what madison college filed it had to strip away all of the heated rhetoric and then try to explain what miss allen all was arguing and then respond to upon itself to double check the record to search for any basis to order the requested discovery finding on the district court denied the motion to compel and further concluded that the motion wasn't substantially justified under federal rule thirty nothing in the district court motion to compel ruling represents an abuse of discretion either in the few remaining moments i'd like to address the motion for sanctions this court me award sanctions under federal rule th procedure thirty eight when an appeal is frivolous and sanctions are appropriate this is an objective test that depends on work product not the lawyer state of mind this appeal is the definition of for volatile an appeal is frivolous when one results obvious to the cons claims are cursory and undeveloped three they reassert reassert a previously rejected version of the facts before they rehash positions the district court properly rejected all of those factors are found here are superficial legal arguments do not provide any basis to reverse the decisions of the district court for previously rejected virtually the one minute left thank you and your arguments argument and case law the district court twice rejected sanctions are warranted she had no hope on appeal she knew coming here was not going to be any better but she did it anyway all of this compound by the fact she couldn't fil quote unquote disputes document you reference it throughout her brief it was never part of the district court record seventeen pages of this never before seen this document appeared in her st appendix which was stricken but one page remains in her accepted supplemental sort