“The district court held that ‘a reasonable jury could conclude that this mention of Ion’s absence from work, in the litany of other complaints about his actions, showed that Chevron considered FMLA protected leave in terminating him.’ We agree with the district court. Drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the nonmoving party, a reasonable jury could conclude that the inclusion of this statement in the same paragraph listing the reasons for Ion’s termination could indicate that his absence was also a reason for his termination.”
Ion v. Chevron USA, Inc., 731 F.3d 379, 391-92 (5th Cir. September 26, 2013) (Guirola, Jr., J.).