The background facts underlying the case are largely uncontested. See Motion
[# 70] at 1–2; Response
[# 77] at 3–4; Reply
[# 79] at 1. On April 28, 2008, Plaintiff informed Defendant, her employer, that she needed to go on short-term disability leave, effective immediately, because of a nodule found on her lung. See id.
That same day, her physician wrote a note stating that Plaintiff “needs to be off of work starting immediately to deal with medical issues, ... with an indeterminate date for return at this time.” See id.
On May 5, 2008, Defendant informed Plaintiff that she had exhausted her available leave under the Family Medical Leave Act and that Defendant could not guarantee that her position would remain open until such time as she could return to work. See id.
Defendant also told Plaintiff that she would remain an employee of Defendant solely for benefits purposes for a period of one year or until she was no longer eligible for disability benefits, whichever occurred first. See id.
Defendant filled Plaintiff's position on June 27, 2008. See id.
On July 17, 2008, Plaintiff told Defendant that she was released to return to work as of August 4, 2008, which was later changed to September 2, 2008. See id.
On September 8, 2008, a member of Defendant's Human Resources department contacted Plaintiff's short-term disability benefits provider, MetLife, and was informed that Plaintiff's short-term disability benefits ended as of August 4, 2008. See id.
Defendant then sent a letter to Plaintiff stating that because her benefits ended on August 4, 2008 and because her position had been filled, Defendant would use August 4, 2008 as her official termination date for the purpose of Plaintiff's request for unemployment benefits. See id.