Bermender

MEMORANDUM **

Monica Bermender appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment in the Defendants’ favor on her claim that they terminated her employment wrongfully in retaliation for her exercise of First Amendment rights. We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we do not recount it here.

To prevail on her retaliation claim, Bermender must show (1) that her speech at issue is constitutionally protected, and (2) that it was a substantial or motivating factor in her termination. See Bd. of County Comm’rs v. Umbehr, 518 U.S. 668, 675 , 116 S.Ct. 2342 , 135 L.Ed.2d 843 (1996). We have held that a plaintiff creates a genuine issue of material fact regarding an employer’s retaliatory motive when the plaintiff produces (1) circumstantial evidence that the employer knew of the protected speech, and (2) circumstantial evidence of at least one of the following: (a) proximity in time between the protected speech and the adverse employment decision such that a jury logically could infer retaliation, (b) the employer’s expressed opposition to the speech, or (c) *612 false or pretextual reasons by the. employer for the…