To v. U.S. Bancorp, 651 F.3d 888

To, a former senior research clerk at U.S. Bank, enlisted in the Minnesota National Guard in 2007 and attended training from April to August 2008, during which illness and fatigue reduced his available training time.
To did not notify his supervisor directly about his illness or leave status; he sent emails and calls but did not consistently follow the reporting-absence procedures.
Two U.S. Bank policies—Reporting Absences and Job Abandonment—required direct supervisor notification and explicit reporting of absences; two consecutive unreported absences could result in termination.
August 20, 2008, U.S. Bank determined To had abandoned his job and terminated him; To received a termination letter on August 21/22, 2008.
To claimed a return-to-work slip (August 15) was faxed by Aspen, suggesting he complied with reporting requirements, while U.S. Bank argued he did not satisfy the policy by direct reporting.
The district court granted summary judgment for U.S. Bank on To’s USERRA claim; this court affirms, holding the termination reasonable and properly noticed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether termination for cause was reasonable under USERRA	To argues lack of proper reporting negates notice and reasonableness	U.S. Bank policy compliance justified termination as two unreported absences	Yes; termination reasonable as a matter of law
Whether To had notice that his conduct could lead to termination	No adequate forewarning; possible implied notice due to policy disclosure	Fairly implied notice via handbook and prior reporting requirements	Yes; notice reasonably conveyed by handbook and prior practice
Whether disputed fact about faxing a return-to-work slip creates a material issue	Whether Aspen faxed August 15 slip could alter termination	Even if fax occurred, policy required direct reporting; termination still proper	No; not material to reasonableness of termination
Whether there is any pretext for termination under USERRA	Evidence of pretext could suggest a non-legitimate reason	No pretext; conduct violated clear policy	No; no material pretext shown

Hillman v. Arkansas Highway & Transp. Dep't, 39 F.3d 197 (8th Cir. 1994) (misconduct not required for just cause; reasonableness governs USERRA)
Rademacher v. HBE Corp., 645 F.3d 1005 (8th Cir. 2011) (reasonableness standard for termination under USERRA)
Francis v. Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., 452 F.3d 299 (4th Cir. 2006) (concept of 'just cause' vs. misconduct in USERRA-like analyses)
Elnashar v. Speedway SuperAmerica, LLC, 484 F.3d 1046 (8th Cir. 2007) (non-assertive memory about events does not create material fact)
Peterson v. Scott Cnty., 406 F.3d 515 (8th Cir. 2005) (summary judgment standards in circuit context)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard: no genuine dispute of material fact)