indication of her intentions to seek a FMLA protected leave for her absence. The April 1 email states that Sunday [Rayne] and a bunch of boys were playing near a deep canal by our levy .... He was so skinned up, anoth er boy jumped in to save him out of the muddy nasty water .... I was out yesterday with Rayne. Nancy I can plan to work hard on attendance and unpredictable things like this mess me up. This communication does not sufficiently connect Greenwell’s absence on March 31, 2003, to a medical condition rising to the level of seriousness protected under FMLA thereby constituting sufficient FMLA-notice. An employee merely alleging sickness as the reason for her absence does not automatically provide sufficient FMLA-notice. See Seaman v. CSPH, Inc., 179 F.3d 297, 302 (5th Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); Satterfield, 135 F.3d at 980 (holding that
holding that both the cfra and the fmla require the employee to provide notice to the employer of the employees intent to take leave holding that a plaintiff who was unable to return to work before his fmla leave expired did not allege any denial of an fmla right but noting that ragsdale left open the possibility that employees could recover for notice violations on a casebycase basis if there was actual harm resulting from the violations holding that an employee who did not present evidence that she could have returned to work prior to the expiration of her fmla leave allowance was not entitled to additional leave merely because her employer had not properly provided her with notice that the leave was designated as fmla leave holding that an employee requesting unforeseeable medical leave is not required to even mention the fmla when requesting leave for a serious health condition holding that the employees reference to his mental condition did not constitute the requisite notice of an intent to invoke fmla leave