per time i needed for psychiatric treatment but i could not specify the time of required time off to quest because it depends on the worker's compensation boy it depends on accommodate his psychological disability the district court had also dismissed other claims that he had four hostile work environment for for discrimination under title seven but especially here because he so first below he has started two different disability claims and it's important to keep those separate one was for physical disability one was for a mental disability  here the the difference is he claims that the lack of the failure of new york city to provide him with an incident report is somehow discrimination due to his disability that is different from him making a request that he had a disability and that there was something that the city could do to accommodate that in a way that would allow him to perform the essential functions  his job they are not they are not so related that his claim of one could allow the city to infer the other and that's made clear by the e e o c form which asked two separate questions you know were you do you claim that your disk women did against based on your disability and then there's a separate second question did you request an accommodation for that for that disability it's because they're two separate inquiries and they're not reasonably related to one another you know they are set ups brutally but in a case of a pro se and one if under first  accommodation in order for the city to be able to to address his need it has to be clear what it is that he's requesting and that what he's asking for is an accommodation that's not clear here the city has to be able to respond to something and it has and has to be able to understand that is at page one hundred forty four in the record i started a one forty three it's an october twenty second two thousand and fourteen letter and if if i could direct your attention to page one four four so this is the letter that above medical and clinical professionals that i should seek some time off to address my medical issues and the district court also did fear come a day and requested assuming it was not exhaust does not of course require an employer to hold an injured employees position open indefinitely while the employee attempts to recover but in a situation like that you come back w accommodation which is a reasonable world can't let you go and leave the river but given your mental problems we can do very well  here the difficulty i think is that another essential link was missing which is that he never asserted that with that accommodation he could perform the essential functions of the job at issue there is never any indication anywhere at the record  either from his letter or in the doctor's submissions that he made that said he needs to take this leave and once he takes it he will be able to return to work and perform this job and without even that essential link how could the city be on notice that it shouldn't best that it that he was asking for something that would allow him to return his job such that they should go back and forth with him and say ok i see that you requested that let's figure something out they couldn't even be on notice that he was seeking an accommodation because he has it claimed that time off from work would allow him to return to work essentially thank you thank you very much more reserved sedition the stillers that just means that we're not going side on the bench year but you'll have a decision from us in due course that i think we have the full benefit of your your arguments thank you very much thank you thank you