Mary Catherine ANDERSON, Plaintiff-Appellant v. ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, DCFS, Defendant-Appellee, 594 F. App'x 318

PER CURIAM. Mary Anderson appeals the district court’s adverse grant of

summary judgment in her action asserting claims under Title VII and the Family and Medical Leave Act. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that the district court did not err in its

summary judgment decision. See Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042, 1046 (8th Cir.2011) (en banc) (de novo review of grant of

summary judgment; for Title VII discrimination claim, ultimate burden falls on plaintiff to produce sufficient evidence to create genuine issue of material fact regarding whether employer’s proffered nondiseriminatory justifications are mere pretext for intentional discrimination); see also Pulczinski v. Trinity Structural Towers, Inc., 691 F.3d 996, 1007 (8th Cir.2012) (Family and Medical Leave Act discrimination claim requires showing that employee’s exercise of rights under Act played

part in employer’s adverse decision). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. . The Honorable Brian S. Miller, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.