# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 7- 20 47

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Dian e E. Perk in s
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v. Meg an J. Bre nn an , Pos tm as te r Gen eral US Po st al Serv ic e

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll ee

Ja m es Jo na th an All en , in hi s ca pa ci ty as em pl oyee & Ma na ge r; M ary A. Che en ey , in he r cap aci ty as em

pl oyee & Ma na ge r; Ka ren Mark s, i n h er capa ci ty as em pl oyee & U n i o n R e p ; E q

u a l E m p l o y m e nt O ppor

tun ity Co m

m iss ion , an In ve sti ga t i v e A ut h o r i t y
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t s

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

3, 2 01 8 Fi le d: Jan ua ry

10 , 20 18 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re GRUENDER, MURPHY, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.Dian e Perk in s ap pe al s fo ll owi ng th e di st ric t co ur t’s ad ve rs e gr an t of su m m ary 1 jud gm en t in he r pr o se em pl oym en t-d is cri m in at io n acti on ag ai ns t her em pl oyer, th e Uni te d St at es Po st al Serv ic e (USPS)

. Perk in s al le ge d t h at USPS di sc riminat or il y ta rg et ed he r fo r ha r s h e r di sc ip li ne th an y ou ng er, whi te , m al e em pl oyees by is su in g

a te rm in at io n no ti ce (la te r red uc ed to a su sp en si on ) fo r rep eat ed ti m e-an d- at te nd an ce vi ol at io ns

. Sh e arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d by de nyin g he r m ot io ns fo r de fau lt jud gm en t, by gr an tin g su m m ary jud gm en t, an d by de nyin g he r po st -jud gm en t m ot io n. W e aff irm.

Fi rs t, we fin d no ab us e of di sc ret io n i n t h e de ni al s of de fau lt jud gm en t, as USPS ti m el y an swe red o nc e pr op erl y se rv ed

. See W ei tz Co ., LLC v. Mac Ken zi e Hou se , LLC, 66 5 F.3 d 97 0, 97 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w); Fed

. R

. Ci v. P. 4( i)( 1) (A)-(B ), 4( i)( 2) , 12 (a)( 2)

. Seco nd , we co nc lu de th at su m m ary jud gm en t was pr op er on th e m eri ts

. See Gib so n v. Am . Gr eet in g s C o rp

. , 6 7 0 F.3 d 84 4, 85 2 (8 th 2 Ci r. 20 12 ) (s ta nd ard of rev ie w). W e ag ree wit h th e di st ric t co ur t th at , ev en as su m in g Perk in s st a t e d a pr im a faci e cas e of ag e, race , an d se x di sc riminat io n, th e ev id en ce

rev eal ed no ge nu in e is su e of m at eri al fact as to whe th er USPS’s pr of fere d reas on fo r is su in g th e te rm in at io n no ti ce was a pr et ex t fo r su ch di sc riminat io n

. S ee Hen ry v. Hob bs , 82 4 F.3 d 73 5, 73 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (at pr et ex t st ag e, te st fo r d e t e r mi n i n g whe th er em

pl oyees are s i mi l a r ly si tu at ed to pl ai nt iff is rig or ou s) ; Fo rres t v. Kraft Fo od s, In c., 28 5 F.3 d 68 8, 69 1- 92 (8 th Ci r. 20 02 ) (ev id e n c e o f di sp arat e tre at m en t

can su pp or t as se rti on of pr et ex t, bu t co m pa rab le em

pl oyee m us t ha ve be en si m il arl y si tu at ed to pl ai nt iff in al l rel ev an t res pe ct s; co m pa rat o r w a s no t si m il arl y si tu at ed

The Hon or ab le St ep he n R. Bo ug h, U n i t e d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 W es te rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.
W e no te th at Perk in s co nt act ed an Equ al Em pl oym en t Opp or tu ni t y ( EEO) 2

c o u n s el or wit hi n 45 da y s of th e da te he r te rm in at io n was sc he du le d to be c o me effe ct iv e. See 29 C.F.R. § 16 14 .10 5( a)(1 ) (s ta ti ng th at “ in th e cas e of pe r s on ne l act io n,” em

pl oyee m us t se ek EEO co un se l in g “ wit hi n 45 da y s of th e effe ct iv e da te of th e act io n” as p rere qu is it e to fil in g c om pl ai nt ).
-2

-whe re pl ai nt iff di d no t sh ow “ co m pa rab le di sc ip li na ry hi st or y ”). Fi na ll y , th e di st ric t

co ur t di d no t clea rly ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g t he po st -jud gm en t m ot io n. See Uni te d St at es v. Met ro

. St

. Lou is Sewer Dis t., 44 0 F

. 3 d 9 30 , 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 06 ) (s ta nd ard of r ev ie w).

Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t. See 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-3

-