*

 After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral

argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record.

See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted April 26, 2005*

Decided April 27, 2005

Before

Hon. JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge

Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge

Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

No. 04-3893

DELECE McDUFFY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

FEDERAL EXPRESS

CORPORATION,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States

District Court for the Northern

District of Illinois, Eastern Division

No. 03 C 3415

Elaine E. Bucklo, 

Judge.

O R D E R

Delece McDuffy, an African-American, was employed by Federal Express

(“FedEx”) from 1996 until she was fired in September 2002. McDuffy claims that

her termination was the result of racial discrimination, and she sued FedEx under

Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq., and 42 U.S.C. §§ 1981 and 1983. The district

court granted summary judgment for FedEx, and we affirm.

McDuffy was employed as a part-time handler from 1996 until February 2001,

when she was promoted to a clerical position. Six months after her promotion,

McDuffy was warned about her poor attendance. This warning was followed in

October 2001 with a disciplinary letter from her supervisor citing her for taking an

UNPUBLISHED ORDER

Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
No. 04-3893 Page 2

unauthorized absence from work. McDuffy received another disciplinary letter in

May 2002 for arriving to work late on three days. A third letter followed in August

2002 after McDuffy left confidential documents in a unsecured location. According

to the employee handbook, FedEx employees are typically fired after accumulating

three disciplinary letters within 12 months, but McDuffy’s supervisor concluded

that she made an honest mistake by not securing the documents and decided not to

fire her. McDuffy, however, received a fourth disciplinary letter the next month

after she left work four hours early without properly alerting her supervisor and

obtaining approval. This letter also informed McDuffy that FedEx was terminating

her employment. McDuffy filed a timely charge with the EEOC alleging racial

discrimination. After her charge was denied, she filed this lawsuit. The district

court granted summary judgment for FedEx, finding that McDuffy had not

established a prima facie case of discrimination because she failed to meet her

employer’s legitimate expectations and identified no similarly situated employee

who was treated more favorably than she was. See McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v.

Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973).

McDuffy makes only general assertions that the district court erred by granting

summary judgment on her Title VII claim, but to the extent her brief contains any

argument, we agree with the district court’s analysis. McDuffy presented no direct

evidence of discrimination, so the district court analyzed her claim under the

McDonnell-Douglas indirect burden-shifting method. See Little v. Ill. Dep’t of

Revenue, 369 F.3d 1007, 1011 (7th Cir. 2004). To establish a prima facie case of

discrimination, McDuffy must show that she: (1) is a member of a protected class,

(2) was meeting FedEx’s legitimate employment expectations, (3) suffered an

adverse employment action, and (4) was treated less favorably than other similarly

situated employees not in the protected class. Id. at 1011. FedEx concedes that

McDuffy, as an African-American, is a member of a protected class, and that her

termination qualifies as an adverse action.

But McDuffy was not meeting FedEx’s legitimate employment expectations

because she was repeatedly written up for poor attendance. See, e.g., Contreas v.

Suncast Corp., 237 F.3d 756, 760-61 (7th Cir. 2001) (proper attendance is implicit

expectation of every employer). As for the fourth prong, McDuffy failed to identify a

single employee outside her protected class who was similarly situated to her yet

treated more favorably. In contrast, FedEx provided a list of six other

employees—three of whom were white and three of whom were AfricanAmerican—who were terminated between January and September 2002 for

accumulating at least three disciplinary letters. Of these, five were terminated

upon receiving their third letter; the remaining employee, like McDuffy, was

terminated upon receiving a fourth.

AFFIRMED.