## Facts

- Alfredo Diaz, an employee of Fort Wayne Foundry Corporation, took FMLA leave after his physician certified he had bronchitis.
- The employer directed Diaz to return to work on April 30, 1995; Diaz did not return and reported he was receiving treatment in Mexico.
- On May 8, the employer received a note from a Mexican physician stating Diaz had gastrointestinal conditions and needed additional rest, creating a conflict with the earlier bronchitis certification.
- Rather than immediately require a statutory second opinion, the employer extended Diaz’s return date to May 18.
- Diaz did not return on May 18 and did not explain his absence; on May 30 the Mexican physician requested yet another month of recuperation.
- To resolve conflicting medical information and determine Diaz’s expected return, the employer directed Diaz to report for a physical examination on June 8.
- The examination notice was sent by certified mail to Diaz’s home address of record under the collective bargaining agreement, and the return receipt was signed.
- Diaz did not appear for the examination and did not seek to reschedule.
- The employer terminated Diaz on June 15 for failing to work after the end of leave.
- Diaz sued under the FMLA; the district court granted summary judgment for the employer, and Diaz appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the employer violated the FMLA by terminating Diaz after extending leave, requiring a verifying medical examination, and discharging him when he neither returned to work nor attended the examination.
2. Whether summary judgment was proper on the undisputed record, including whether burden-shifting analysis affected the outcome.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Fort Wayne Foundry.
- The court held the employer did not violate the FMLA by requiring medical verification in response to conflicting certifications and by terminating Diaz when he failed to return after approved leave and failed to attend the scheduled examination.
- The court questioned the usefulness of McDonnell Douglas-style burden shifting in this setting but concluded that, even assuming a prima facie case, the undisputed facts showed no FMLA violation.

## Legal Principles

- FMLA leave may be conditioned on compliance with lawful certification and verification requirements; an employer may seek verification, including through statutorily authorized medical-opinion mechanisms, when certifications conflict or are questionable.
- An employer does not interfere with FMLA rights by enforcing neutral, generally applicable notice procedures (including collectively bargained rules using the employee’s last address of record) to communicate verification requirements.
- An employee’s failure to return to work after approved leave, coupled with failure to cooperate in reasonable verification steps (such as attending a scheduled examination or communicating to adjust it), can forfeit FMLA protection and support discharge for absenteeism.

## Conclusion

The court upheld termination where the employer extended leave, used neutral notice procedures to require a verifying medical exam in response to conflicting medical information, and discharged the employee after he neither returned to work nor cooperated with verification after the approved leave period ended.


Diaz v. Fort Wayne Foundry Corp., 131 F.3d 711 (7th Cir. 1997)