Free Reply to Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

SUMMARY OF EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS RE: PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSIVE STATEMENT OF FACTS1 Responsive SOF: Issue: Objections For Purposes of Issue Stated: Relevance: these "facts" and/or their "supporting evidence" are not relevant because they concern time periods years after the alleged violations of the Act. Relevance; Conclusory; Self-serving; Vague : these "facts" establish only diagnosis or occasional incidents in which Plaintiff experienced discomfort, but do not establish his Major Life Activities were Substantially Limited under the Act [e.g., the deposition reference for RSOF ¶ 8 only states that he could sometimes stand for an hour until he had pain, but it "depends on the daily activity"]. Further, they fail to detail frequency, severity, or other specifics. See also CSOF ¶¶ 2, 3. Id; Additionally these events occurred in connection with a light duty request; Plaintiff returned to full duty on March 6, 2001 (the same day he reported varied complaints to Berry). Of note, Berry is a physical therapist, not a physician. Misstates Facts

Is Plaintiff ¶¶ 1-5; 10, 21-22, 26-7, Disabled Under the Act? 29-34, 3639; 40-41 ¶¶ 6-8, 1115, 17-19; 28, 35, 40 Is Plaintiff Disabled Under the Act?

¶ 16

Is Plaintiff Disabled Under the Act?

¶¶ 51-53

Can Plaintiff Perform the Essential Functions of His Position? Did Plaintiff Notify USPS of His Disability?

¶¶ 16-21

Foundation: Plaintiff has provided No Evidence that the Medical Records were provided to the Postal Service. Only those records contained in the Medical File or Supervisor's file were provided; Misstates Facts .

Responsive SOF ¶¶ 56-58 do not concern issues of whether Plaintiff was a qualified person with a disability in fall 2001 and Spring 2002, and will not be addressed for purposes of this reply.

1

Case 2:04-cv-00429-MHM

Document 78-2

Filed 06/06/2006

Page 1 of 2

¶¶ 4346,65-74

Did Plaintiff Notify USPS that Disabled? Request Accommodation? Miscellaneous Miscellaneous

Relevance; Conclusory; Foundation; Vague:

¶¶ 54, 55 ¶¶ 75-78

Relevance; Misstates Facts Speculation; Conclusory Statement; Relevance

Case 2:04-cv-00429-MHM

Document 78-2

Filed 06/06/2006

Page 2 of 2