In Reynolds V

In Reynolds v. Inter-Industry Conference on Auto Collision Repair, Reynolds began work for his employer on August 25, 2005. On August 8, 2006, his child was born prematurely. He requested time off, which was granted. He requested further leave for November, 2005, when the child would be released from the hospital, and was terminated, the employer saying he was not entitled to FMLA leave because he had not been an employee for 12 months. The court ruled:

A) for Reynolds, since the birth of a child is a qualifying event under the FMLA
B) for Reynolds, since he notified his employer at least 30 days in advance of the need for leave, by which time, he would be an eligible employee
C) for the employer, because the employee failed to provide sufficient notice that he was requesting leave for a potentially FMLA-qualifying reason
D) for the employer, because the employee was not an eligible employee, entitled to FMLA leave