# Calero-Cerezo v. U.S. Dep of Justice

> Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · May 14, 2004 · 355 F.3d 6

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/201012

## Case

- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
- **Decided:** May 14, 2004
- **Citations:** 355 F.3d 6
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Cited by:** 692 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/201012

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that span of one month between filing EEO complaint and being suspended was sufficient to establish prima facie claim, but noting that “[t]hree and four month periods have been held insufficient to establish a causal connection based on temporal proximity”
- finding that the plaintiff established a causal connection between the filing of her EEOC complaint and receipt of a proposed suspension because the temporal proximity was “roughly a month”
- concluding that one month was sufficient to satisfy burden of showing causal connection, but noting that three and four-month periods have been held insufficient to establish causation
- noting that "[s]ummary judgment is appropriate when 'the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to a material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgm…
- noting that “cases that accept mere temporal proximity between an employer’s knowledge of protected activity and an adverse employment action . . . must be very close” and that “[t]hree and four month periods have been held insufficient to establish a causal connection based o…

## Opinion text

United States Court of Appeals
For the First Circuit

No. 02-2643
SYLVIA I. CALERO-CEREZO

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ET AL.,

Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this Court issued on January 14, 2004 is
corrected as follows:

On page 29, line 2, change "with or without an accommodation"
to "at least with an appropriate accommodation."

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/201012. Public record. Not legal advice.