Aft ere xa m i ni ngthe b r i efs an d the r ec o r ds, we ha ve c o nc l ude d tha t o r ala r g um en t * is u n n ec es sa ry . T h u s, th e a p p ea ls a re su b m itt ed on th e b rie fs a n d th e re c or d
. See F ED . R. A PP . P. 34(a)( 2). 

# United States Court of App eals

F or the Se ven th C ir cu it Ch i cago ,I l l i nois 60 604 Subm i tte d Jul y 1 5, 20 09 * Deci ded J uly16 , 20 09 B efo re R IC H A R D D . C U D A H Y , Cir cu i tJudg e D IA N E P . W O O D , Cir cu i tJudg e JO H N D A N IE L T IN D E R, Cir cu i tJudg e N o. 08- 3713 MAT T HE W J AC KS O N , P laint if f-A ppell ant,

v. U N IT E D P A R C E L SE R V IC E , I N C
. , D efend a nts -A pp ellees
. A pp ealfro m the U ni ted S tat es Dist ri ct Court f orthe So uthern Dist ri ct o fI l l i noi s. N o. 07-cv-0450 -M JR-C JP M ich ae l J. R ea ga n, Judg e .

O R D E R I n thi s di ve r si tya ct i o n fo rr et al i at o r y di scha r g e unde rI l l i no i s l aw, M at th ew J ac k so n, an Il lin ois cit ize n, su ed U P S, an O h io c or p or at ion w ith its p rin c ip al p lac e o f bu sin es s in G eorgia. J acks on claim s tha t U PS fir ed him i n 20 07 in retali ation for a w orker’s NONP RE C E DE NT I AL DI S PO S I T I ON To be ci ted o nl y in acco rdance w i th Fe d . R. A p p . P. 32 .1N o. 08
- 3713 Page 2

com pensati on cl ai m he fi l ed i n 199 9. The di str i ct c ourtgr anted U PS s um m ar y j ud gm ent, a n d w e a ffi r m. I n Jan ua ry 2007 Jackson drov e to a cus tom er’s hom e and confron ted the cu stom er, J am i e El l i ott, o vera com pla i nt she had l odged w i th U PS that a ccused hi m o fl eaving a seve n-foo t s ki d m ar k in herdri veway. Accordi ng to a w ri tte n re portEl l i ottsubm i tte d to UPS, El l i o ttr efus ed to o penhe rs to r m do o rf o rJ ac k so n b ec au se he s ee m ed ag i ta te d, a nd sh e as k ed hi m t o l ea ve thr ee t i m es b efo r e he fi na l l y de par te d. At th atpo i nts he c al l ed th e sh er iff. The da y a fte rthe i nc i den t, El l i o ttt el eph o ne d the UPS c en te ra nd ins truct ed th ats he w oul d not t ol er ate J acks on a s herU PS dri ver . I fhe c am e ba ck, she sai d, she would have hi m ar re ste d. U PS o ffi ci al s inter vi ew ed both Ell i ottand J acks on, and J acks on a dm i tte d that h e h ad gon e t o E lliott ’s h om e, an d th atE lliott h ad ob j ec te d to h is v isit . U P S te rm in at ed h im “fo r c on d u c t u nb ec om in g of a n U P S em p loy ee .” J acks on s ued U PS, cl ai m i ng tha t the co m pany had fi re d him i n re tal i ati on forfi l i ng a w or ker ’ s co m pensati on cl ai m se ven y ear s e ar l i er . The di str i ct c ourt, deter m i ni ng tha t J acks on f ai l ed to es tabl i sh a pri m a f aci e ca se ofr eta l i ati on, gr anted sum m ar y j ud gm ent t o U P S. Th e c ou rtex p lain ed th atJac ks on h ad n otes ta b lish ed a c au sa l link be tw ee n h is c laim an d h is d isc h ar ge be c au se th os e re sp on sib le for firin g Ja c ks on d id n otkn ow ab ou t h is wor k er ’ s co m pen sa ti o n c l ai m . Mor eo ve r, the c o ur t co nt i nue d, J ac k so n’ s th r ea te ni ng behavi orto w ar ds Ell i ottpro vi ded a val i d basi s forhi s di schar ge, wh i ch J acks on had not sh ow n to be p re te x tu al. O n ap p eal J acks on ch all en ges th e d istri ct cou rt’s conc lusion th at he f ail ed to satisfy h is b u rd en of sh ow in g a ca u sa l link be tw ee n h is w or ke r’s co m p en sa tio n cla im an d h is di sc ha r g e. T o s ucc ee d o n a c l ai m o fr et al i at o r y di sc ha r g e, J ac k so n muste st ab l i sh( 1) tha t he wa s a U P S e mp l o y e e b e f o r e h e w a s i nj u r e d ; ( 2 ) th a th e fi l e d a w o r k e r ’ s c o mp e n s a t i o n c l a i m; an d (3) th atth er e w as a c au sa l co n n ec tio n be tw ee n h is c laim an d h is d isc h ar ge . Se eD ot s on v. B R P U . S., Inc. , 520 F.3d 70 3, 70 7 (7 th C ir. 20 08 ); Carte rv. Te nna ntCo. , 38 3 F . 3d 673, 67 7 ( 7 th Ci r . 2 0 0 4 ) . B utthe e l e men to fc a us a t i o n i s n o tme ti f, a mon go the rthing s , UPSh a d a va lid ba sis

— th atis to sa y, on e th atis n otp re te x tu al— for firin g Ja c ks on . See C a rter, 38 3 F . 3d at 677. W e ag r ee wi ththe di st r i ctc o ur t’ s an aly si s. I t i s “e ss en ti al ” f o ra pl aint i ffa ss er ting re ta liat or y d isc h ar ge u n d er Il lin ois law to es ta b lish th atth os e re sp on sib le for firin g h im kn ew ab ou t h is w or ke r’s co m p en sa tio n cla im . Se eH i at tv. Rockwel l Int ’ l Corp. , 26 F. 3d 761, 769 n. 7 ( 7th Ci r. 19 94) ( ci ti ng M ar i n v . Am . M e atPacki ng Co. , 5 6 2 N. E. 2 d 2 8 2 , 2 8 6 ( I l l
. App .N o. 08
- 3713 Page 3

19 90 )); s e eal s o F ans l ow v. Chi
. M f g. Ct r . , Inc . , 38 4 F . 3d 469, 48 3 ( 7th Ci r. 20 04) ( w hi stl ebl ower re ta liat ion ); St agm an v. Ryan , 1 76 F . 3d 98 6, 9 99
- 10 01 ( 7th Ci r . 1 99 9) ( F i r stAm en dm en t retaliati on). J acks on, how ever, prod uc ed no evid en ce th at an y of th e sup ervisors re sponsibl e forfi ring hi m , nam el y, U PS Busi ness M anage r Ron Phi l l i ps and Labor M anage r M ar k Col l i ns, were aw ar e o fhi s 1 999 benefi ts cl ai m . UPS, o n the othe r hand , subm i tte d d ep os itio n s in w h ich P h illip s a n d C ollin s a ss er te d th atth ey w er e n ot . Jac ks on als o t ak es iss u e w ith th e d ist ric t c ou rt ’s d et er m in at ion th at, eve n if h is su per vi so r s k ne w ab o uthi s wor k er ’ s co m pen sa ti o n c l ai m , UPS ha d a v al i d b as i s f o rfi r i ng hi m . He poi nts t o a deci si on fro m a sta te unem plo ym ent-benefi ts appeal co ncl ud i ng tha t he was not fi re d fo r m i sco nd uct, and ar gues that thi s i s e vi dence thathi s co nfr ontat i on w i th El l i ottwas si m plya prete xt f orr eta l i ati on. I l l i noi s l aw , however, expl i ci tl y m ake s su cha g en cyde ci si o ns i na dm i ss ibl e i n a ny di spu te o th ertha n o ne i nv o l vingune m pl o y m en t b e ne fi t s . 8 2 0 I LCS4 0 5 / 1 9 0 0 B. A ccor dingly, we AF F I RM the j ud gm ent o fthe dist ri ct c ourt .