appeal she's alleging the denial of reasonable accommodations under federal disability law retaliation in violation of family medical leave act and a hostile work environment on account of disability and race let me start with the reasonable accommodation under federal law on two occasions in late two thousand and twelve after the plaintiff had a series of surgeries for both hernia and rest cancer  markovitch transferred an aggressive student into planets class by then let me ask you that cancer with certainly a qualifying disability but how was the cancer in any way related to the accommodation the hernia might have been in terms of lifting in what you said or dealing with this student that is a hernia patient to be a disability under react yes and the hernia is a disability under colwell versus suffolk sitting and lifting are major life activities and the hernia would affect her ability to do those things so you're correct the reasonable accommodation denials in late two thousand and twelve primarily deal with the hernia and on again two students in her class that plaintiff didn't feel well let me ask you this wasn't that resolved by the surgery well she lives the question i guess is whether she then had a disability at the time of episode i would say yes under the americans with disabilities act she had a record of such an impairment under twelve thousand one hundred to one so even if the cancer had subsided momentarily because of the surgery she had a record of such impairment same would hold true with the hernia they knew she had i thought that then with respect to the concept of having a record of impairment it's someone discriminating against you because you were previously disable i'm not sure how that fits into your theory that a reasonable accommodation wasn't necessary because they knew she had had surgery that year so she was in a fragile state just because she had the surgery doesn't mean she's she's doing better and i'm trying to get it straight are you saying that this is because of i think it's both because she had a record of this impairment she had a surgery she was still fragile she was concerned about what an aggressive student might have on her physical condition having undergone the surgery so she was  precarious state so for that reason she requested this accommodation you know i'm a special ed teacher i can't have the students in my classroom if they have a history of violence a fear of re the question but if she had a record of such impairment and she knew she had the surgery no i guess that's a concern that's the concern i'm not sure how i can answer it any better than that you know it was certainly related to her disability and it related to her physical condition which was the hernia and and then it sort of came back in march the following year when the nd student she had to tackle the nd student and she got injured again and she needed emergency hernia surgery because of that episode so throughout this process it just looks to me like this was a disability related request covered under the statute and the district court ruled against because she was afraid of future injury citing the preventing somebody from seeking protection under the act so that language that the district court use i don't see that anywhere else so just looking at this from the standpoint of her preexisting injuries it looks to me like this was a request relating to a protected disability under the ada you have a minute left you said three minutes for a bottle let me briefly discuss the family medical leave act  and twelve plaintiff told the principal's office assistant that she planned to take similarly she was have explored tory surgery point of rights and perhaps a day but during this period she was in touch with the administrative assistant advised against her progress making it clear that she was going to comply with the rules in terms of the paperwork but two days later she was issued in a wall letter threatening with possible terminations even though the principal berger who sent that letter knew that pla was in the process of complying with the in house similar rules so the jury may find the plaintiff was not a wall and that the threat of losing her position would be enough to dissuade a reasonable employee of invoking family medical leave act in the future i would point out that there is a disparate treatment component to this for purposes of showing on loss of retaliation because the record shows at page twenty three of five a comparable employee had been literally didn't complete the paperwork was absent a more days she got a warning letter too but there was no threat of terminations all right thank you that ms so seeks to revive here because in each instance she failed to establish and eventually basis for a key element of her claim with regards to the failure to a comedy claim those that did not have a hernia at the time that honor there's no evidence whatsoever in the record about a fragile condition or a weak condition that missed those that was in at the time of her request she only center the request and the reason for the request on a fear of re injury and  elsewhere that she was in a weakened condition indeed the complaint says at page nineteen of the record that at all times she was able to perform the essential functions of her job and so the reason that she gave her request was a figure of re injury which is not causally connected to any disability under the meaning of the certainly it may be the case that a number of employees who've had a medical event made beer reinjury there's a relationship between her fear of reinjury and her disability that doesn't make a causal connection in our brief we cited to felix where this court held that a fear of closed spaces demming from and based on the record evidence if you're reinjury was was speculative not not to say that it was unreasonable but it was like a lot of it wasn't tied to any current condition that she had at the time that she made her request and that was not letter did not result in any adverse consequences nor would it dissuade any employee from taking a similar leave provided they were willing to comply with a basic requirement of providing medical documentation is undisputed here that able to take him or leave and indeed she did so and it was explained to her that the reason she was being contacted was because she had no other leave and the school was trying to avoid an interruption in her health insurance as to her transfer  to the school's main site again there was no negative consequence or adverse employment consequences attached that this is a maintain her salary her benefits her seniority and her preferred teaching assignments there's nothing in the record showing that she was denied anything that she wanted except for her preferred location and it was completely unconnected to her family leave it happened months after the leave and there was an intervening disciplinary incident with a paraprofessional with the police were called  so the move as the principal testified allowed her to teach her preferred class but remove her from that environment and finally with regard to the hostile work environment claims the majority of the allegations regarding a hostile work environment have no connection to any protected characteristic including in principle ignoring or being rude to miss those on several occasions the principal calling her stupid following the police incident non party teacher referring to her as a difficult person similarly the challenge personnel decisions don't relate to race or disability she was she was another teacher chosen to attend a workshop and other comments were trivial or innocuous such as a comment that one teacher made that some black people eat with their hands and the undisputed context being that they were problem shooting about a student who was resistant to using cutlery so even taken altogether and these were sporadic unconnected comments over a long period of time even all taken together they simply don't create a pervasive atmosphere of abuse argument i just said was that she didn't provide medical records when asked three times she told him that she would she told him she would provide the proper paperwork when she got her doctor's certification that's in harappa david so that's jarring i think it's jarring for an employee to get a letter like this you could be fired because you're not complying with rules that a jury could find plain it was complying with what's going on here this is part of a pattern of abuse and harassment going on for quite some time with the same principle that factual allegation is also part of a longstanding hostile work environment but they didn't always threaten people with losing their position as i mentioned a few minutes ago somebody else in a similar situation was not threatened with terminations you know somebody who works for a living who needs to salary who's got benefits being threatened with terminations i would think it's pretty jarring to be issued a letter like it's one minute one minute ok on the hostile work environment very quickly we have a series of racial comments we have a series of disability related comments we also have a long series of racially officially neutral adverse personal actions which the district court summarize for us in the opinion at  nine on special appendix eighteen now those examples none of them explicitly reference race or disability but this court has said many times that facially neutral adverse personal decisions can support a hostile work environment claim if you can connect those adverse decisions with disability or race or gender and we have here an adverse decisions made by berger and markovitch the same people who had made hostile comments toward the plaintiff based on her and based on her disability so under the totality of the circumstances under summary judgment record a jury could find that over a two year period or so it was a series of otherwise inexplicable events demonstrating hostility toward her numerous medical leave requests surgeries being out of work and coming back it just looks like a concerted effort to demonstrate unhappiness with the plaintiff's medical conditions her frequent absences that can support a hostile