Holding that evidence of tight temporal proximity, unfounded performance concerns, warnings from other employees not to engage in the protected activity, and disparate treatment was enough to create an issue of fact regarding pretext
Holding that a court may not resolve genuinely disputed facts where "the question of jurisdiction is dependent on the resolution of factual issues going to the merits"
Holding that law of the case applied to certain issues not explicitly addressed by appellate court where those issues were fully briefed and considered by the court
Examining the structure of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and concluding that "the type of weapon used or carried is a sentencing enhancement, and not an element" of the offense