Cardenas v. First Midwest Bank, 114 F. Supp. 3d 585

Cardenas, deaf since infancy, worked at First Midwest Bank from 2006 until 2014 as a Lockbox Clerk in three grades.
She alleges promotion denial and lower pay than less-qualified, non-disabled coworkers despite superior performance and skills.
She took intermittent FMLA leave beginning in 2009 for head/neck pain and surgery on a cochlear implant; alleges retaliation for that leave.
In 2010–2011 she sought full-time positions that did not require telephone use and was denied or not interviewed.
She filed EEOC Charge I in July 2011; after that, she alleges increased discipline, segregation, hours cuts, and unequal treatment, culminating in a March 2014 unpaid leave and later termination.
She filed Charge II in June 2014 alleging retaliation and discrimination; the amended complaint is the basis for Counts II–IV in this action.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Illinois retaliatory discharge viability	Plaintiff asserts termination was in retaliation for pursuing workers’ compensation claim.	Defendant contests causal link and argues legitimate, non-retaliatory reasons may apply.	Count II survives; causation shown plausibly, public policy violated.
ADA retaliation timeliness and causation	Plaintiff alleges adverse actions linked to EEOC Charge I and causal connection to retaliation.	Plaintiff fails to allege dates for adverse acts and lacks causation proof.	Count III dismissed with leave to replead specific dates; causation insufficient as pleaded.
FMLA retaliation eligibility and scope	Plaintiff alleges retaliation for FMLA activity from 2009–2013 and seeks relief accordingly.	In 2013 she did not meet the 1,250-hour threshold, so not an eligible employee for that period; 2009–2013 conduct may proceed.	Count IV granted as to 2009–2013 conduct; denied as to 2013 or later conduct due to ineligibility.

Brooks v. Pactiv Corp., 729 F.3d 758 (7th Cir. 2013) (retaliatory discharge requires showing motive; pretext rejected at pleading stage)
Zuccolo v. Hannah Marine Corp., 387 Ill.App.3d 561 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008) (causation in Illinois retaliatory discharge is a factual question not resolved on pleadings)
Malin v. Hospira, Inc., 762 F.3d 552 (7th Cir. 2014) (denial of promotions and salary increases can be adverse actions under FMLA retaliation)
Pagel v. TIN, Inc., 695 F.3d 622 (7th Cir. 2012) (convincing mosaic of circumstantial evidence may show causation in FMLA retaliation)
Ames v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., 629 F.3d 665 (7th Cir. 2011) (direct method for FMLA retaliation requires protected activity, adverse action, and causal link)
Daugherty v. Wabash Ctr. Inc., 577 F.3d 747 (7th Cir. 2009) (eligibility for FMLA protection requires 12 months and 1,250 hours)
Burlington Indus. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (Supreme Court 1998) (definition of adverse action in employment discrimination context)