Christopher L. Peterson v. General Motors Corporation

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 09a0335n.06
Filed: May 15, 2009
No. 08-1179
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
CHRISTOPHER L. PETERSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE: KENNEDY, GIBBONS, and ROGERS, Circuit Judges.
ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Plaintiff Christopher Peterson appeals the district court’s grant
of summary judgment in favor of defendant General Motors Corporation. Peterson brought this suit
alleging violations of ERISA, violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act, retaliation under
Michigan’s Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act, and discrimination under Michigan’s Persons with
Disabilities Civil Rights Act. After reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law,
and hearing oral argument, this court determines that no jurisprudential purpose would be served by
a panel opinion and affirms the district court’s decision for the reasons stated in Judge Steeh’s
January 7, 2008, opinion and order.
On appeal, Peterson raises a new argument challenging the district court’s finding that he was
not an eligible employee under the FMLA. Peterson claims that the district court erred in relying

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 08-1179
Peterson v. General Motors Corp.
- 2 -
on GM’s calculations of the number of hours he worked in the twelve months prior to his last
disability leave period because GM improperly based its calculations on a standard eight-hour work
day. Because Peterson failed to raise this issue before the district court, his argument will not be
considered on appeal. See Moorer v. Baptist Memorial Health Care System, 398 F.3d 469, 487 (6th
Cir. 2005); Noble v. Chrysler Motors Corp., Jeep Div., 32 F.3d 997, 1002 (6th Cir.1994).
Furthermore, though it is unclear which dates GM used to calculate the relevant twelve-month
FMLA period, Peterson did not challenge this aspect of the calculation before the district court or
on appeal.
The district court properly granted summary judgment in favor of GM. The judgment of the
district court is therefore affirmed.

-- 2 of 2 --