Filed: May 27, 2011
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Decided May 26, 2011 Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge FREDERICK J. KAPALA, District Judge* No. 08-2820 KEVIN KASTEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS CORP., Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. No. 07-C-0686—Barbara B. Crabb
Summary: NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Decided May 26, 2011 Before WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge FREDERICK J. KAPALA, District Judge* No. 08-2820 KEVIN KASTEN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS CORP., Defendant-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. No. 07-C-0686—Barbara B. Crabb,..
More
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with
Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
In the
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Decided May 26, 2011
Before
WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge
FREDERICK J. KAPALA, District Judge*
No. 08‐2820
KEVIN KASTEN,
Plaintiff‐Appellant,
v.
SAINT‐GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS CORP.,
Defendant‐Appellee.
___________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Wisconsin.
No. 07‐C‐0686—Barbara B. Crabb, Judge.
On Remand from the United States Supreme Court
No. 09‐834
*
The Honorable Frederick J. Kapala, of the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, sitting by designation.
No. 10‐2820 Page 2
___________________________
ORDER
On March 22, 2011, the Supreme Court reversed our decision in this case and
remanded the matter for proceedings in conformity with its opinion. Kasten v. Saint‐Gobain
Performance Plastics Corp., 131 S.Ct. 1325 (2011). In light of that opinion – concluding that
oral complaints fall within the scope of the phrase “filed any complaint” in 29 U.S.C. §
215(a)(3) – it is ORDERED that this case be remanded to the district court for further
proceedings pertaining to Kasten’s antiretaliation claim under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
