v. Extendicare Health Servs., Inc., 515 F.3d 836, 841 (8th Cir.2008). The Court finds that McCracken did not engage in statutorily protected conduct. Internal disputes over matters of office and personnel management fail to support a whistleblower complaint for want of a violation of law. See Hedglin v. City of Willmar, 582 N.W.2d 897, 902 (Minn.1998). Further, reports made in the normal course of an employee’s job duties are not statutorily protected activity. See Carlson v. Extendicare Health Services, Inc., Civil File No. -05-1438 (MJD/SRN), 2006 WL 2069254, at *6 (D.Minn. July 26, 2006) (“[Ejmployees do not engage in protected activity when making reports in the normal course of their job duties.”); see also Freeman v. Ace Telephone Ass’n, 404 F.Supp.2d 1127, 1140 (D.Minn.2005) (<HOLDING>). b. Adverse Employment Action McCracken claims
holding that police report of witnesss statement was inadmissible because witness had not adopted report as accurate when matter was fresh in his memory holding that ceo was simply doing his job in making report because he was responsible for the financial health of the company and had a duty to report to the board any irregularities in the boards practices holding that rule was not violated where officer stated he made a report but was unable to find it because there was no report to tender to counsel holding that the defendant conceded the accuracy of his prior convictions in his psi report by failing to object to the report holding that the defendants prior conviction referenced in his presentence report could be taken as admitted because he had made no objection to the facts in his report