by imposing a standard for reasonable accommodations of actually reading in the future the standard is this court is aware is whether or not it is feasible reasonable under the ordinary run of the cases and the rd or on the reasonable accommodations claim is if the court said well you have to work ability then at a minimum the employer should be required to go through the interactive process with the employee events of september th had told her nesting coaching is not an on two occasions the she was being adversely affected by coworkers and on one occasion specifically told her nesting coach that she was very serious matter we're still investigating it at that point in time and both reasonable accommodation claim and of the disparate treatment saying i'm sorrier is now on notice that she is asking for accommodations number one and number didn't request an accommodation and i think the record is clear on this before the incident then then the law is clear that from from an accommodation perspective there's nothing to accommodate as long as wayfair is applying its conduct rule in a non for rejecting that there is a rd accommodation request if you will built into that request which is and don't terminate me for the thing that i already did before you as you were terminated the other employee before you w notice of my disability that and that is what is not a reasonable accommodation retroactive forgiveness so they for the accommodation of peace as long as way to fair can establish that is applied is neutral in a non no because she's been the parties disagree on what the law is here i think the rise really clear that reasonable means more than feasible it means not definitely will be affected if but some reason to believe that these accommodations will address the problem that the two accommodation at that she suggested don't go to the root of the problem at all given that there is evidence in the record that this wasn't simply a personality dispute with a particular coworker she had behaved this way in other instances with other employees and so removing her from that coworker or working from home for example which wouldn't obviate the need to communicate with colleagues that the accommodation request doesn't go to that if i may i'd go to turn back to why i understand your concern judgments about the timing of the decision versus the implementation of the decision in a disparate treatment in the terminations context more so because i can envision a situation in which a decision to terminate has been made on some period of time elapses a disclosure of disability is made and that the evidence would support a finding that notwithstanding that the employer was initially leaning toward germ ultimate decision to execute was nonetheless discriminatory and i would submit to you that on this record the evidence doesn't support that at all and the fact that the decision was made with no knowledge of the disability even if not  evidence that the ultimate execution of that decision was not a pretext or the other evidence as it is of the evidence that some dispute in the record that way fair has terminated other employees for the same conduct and has not not terminated any other employee for the same conduct and then to return to bieber's point which he emphasized this about joni donovan's conduct during a phone call with trey and that the skepticism that tony donovan expressed on the phone call i would submit that that skepticism does not reflect the good and inference of that does not reflect hostility on the it's that disability but rather skepticism that mr am who had an opportunity several times before she left because of the terminations and it's well settled that condoms even if caused by a disability does not equate to disability discrimination if there are no further questions i'll sit down ok thank you thank you very much