In order to state a prima facie claim of termination in violation of Title VII, a plaintiff must demonstrate, inter alia , that at the time she was discharged her job performance was satisfactory. Moreover, if plaintiff does make out a prima facie case, defendant is then entitled to rebut the case by articulating a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for its action. Plaintiff must then demonstrate by the preponderance of the evidence that the defendant's proffered reason for the termination of employment was pretextual. Here, in light of plaintiff's record of excessive absenteeism, it is clear that she can neither demonstrate that her job performance was satisfactory at the time of the termination of her employment or that defendant's proffered reason for firing her was pretextual. A separate order effecting the rulings made in this memorandum is being entered herewith.
Judgment is entered in favor of defendant against plaintiff.
J. Frederick Motz United States District Judge 1. Plaintiff claims she took leave following the Last Chance Agreement because she was having a problem with her knee and regarded her absences as leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act. At the time of these absences, however, plaintiff had already taken in excess of 12 weeks of leave in the prior 12-month period, thus exhausting her available FMLA leave. Moreover, at the time plaintiff took her leave after the Last Chance Agreement, she was not a protected employee under the FMLA because she had not worked the requisite 1,250 hours in the preceding year. Plaintiff also makes various other claims for alleged demotion, denial of promotions and alleged harassment.