“Fuqua and Vontice were both assistant managers at the same Wal-Mart store. Vontice had an arguably worse history of work violations. Both were found to have improperly taken cash advances and both timely paid them back. . . .[E]ach was given thirty days to repay the money and obtain an hourly position at another store. Fuqua failed to obtain another position and was terminated. However, Fuqua has presented evidence . . . that while she was terminated for failing to obtain a position at another store, Vontice was essentially handed a new position by Wal-Mart management without having to go through an interview process. The Court finds that the purported disparate treatment of Fuqua and Vontice to have taken place under nearly identical circumstances and is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.” Fuqua v. Wal-Mart Stores E., L.P., No. 2:09cv188-SA-DAS, 2011 WL 2269020, at *4 (N.D. Miss. Jun. 7, 2011).