# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 7- 21 63

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Rau l Gar de a

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

JB S USA, LLC; Swi ft P or k C om pa ny

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

Co nAg ra Fo od s, In c.

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l

Defe nd an t

__

__ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e So ut he rn Dis tri ct of I owa - Des M oi ne s

__

__ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Decem

be r 13 , 20 18 Fi le d: Feb ru ary 8, 2 01 9

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN and ERICKSON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es , and MAGNUSON, Dis tri ct 1 Ju dg e.

__ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le Pau l A. Mag nu so n, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta , si tt in g b y de si gn at io n.MAGNUSON, Dis tri ct Ju dg e.

App el la nt Rau l Gard e a ap pe al s th e Dis tri ct Co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary 2 jud gm en t in fav or of App el le es JB S USA, LL C a n d S w ift Po rk Co m pa ny (co ll ect iv el y , “ JB S”). Fo r th e fo ll owi ng reas on s, we af fir m

.

I. Ba ck gr ou nd

App el la nt Rau l Gard ea wor ke d at App el le e Swif t Po rk Co m

pa ny, a who ll y

own e d s u b s id ia ry of App el le e JB S USA, a s a m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic at JB S’s po rk

pr oc es si ng faci li ty in Mar s h a l l t o w n , Io wa. In earl y 20 14
, Gard ea was tre at ed fo r
carp al tu nn el synd ro m e in hi s rig ht wris t. In Feb ru ary 20 14
, Gard ea’s m ai n tre at in g ph y si ci an , Dr. Pau ls on , im po se d a te m

po rary wor k r e s t r i ct io n li m it in g Gard ea to li fti ng no m or e th an 40 po un ds wit h h is rig ht arm

.

Gard ea ’ s te m

por ar y w or k re st ric ti on s ch an ge d m

ul ti pl e ti m es th ro ug ho ut 20 14
,
as hi s ph y si ci an s co nt in ue d to in crea se an d lo wer t he am ou nt of wor k he co ul d do wit h hi s rig ht arm ba se d up on hi s c a pa ci ty an d le ve l of pa in

. JB S acco m m od at ed Gard ea’s wo rk res tri ct io ns du rin g t hi s t im e b y gi vi ng hi m

li gh t d ut y

work

.

Fi na ll y , in Octo be r 20 14 , Gard ea u nd erwen t a f un ct io na l ca pa ci ty ev al ua ti on (“ FCE”). Bas ed on th e FC E, th e te st in g ph y si ci an im po se d ne w wor k res tri ct io ns : wais t to flo o r l i f

t i ng of 35 po un ds ; wais t to cro wn li fti ng of 25 po un ds ; bi la te ral

carr y in g of 30 po un ds ; an d rig ht un il at eral carr y in g of 15 po un ds

. Gard ea’s ph y si ci an al so no te d th at he ha d si gn ifi can t di ffi cu lt y ho ld in g, gr ab bi ng , an d rel eas in g to ol s,

an d do ub te d hi s ab il it y to ret ur n to wor k as a m ech an ic

. I n Nov em be r 20 14
, Dr.

The Hon or ab le Jo hn A. Ja rv ey , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e So ut he rn 2 Dis tri ct of I owa

.
-2

-Pau ls on co nc lu de d th at Gard ea ha d reac he d m ax im um m ed ic al im

pr ov em en t an d

m ad e th e wor k re st ric ti on s fr om th e FCE p erm an en t.

JB S de te rm in ed th at Gard ea co ul d no lo ng e r p e r f o r m th e du ti es of a

m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic be cau se of hi s pe rm an en t wor k res tri ct io ns

. Sp eci fic al ly, JB S

co nc lu de d th at it co ul d no t acco m m od at e Gard ea’s li fti ng res tri ct io ns be cau se hi s job du ti es req ui red hi m to reg ul arl y li ft ob jects weig hi ng m or e th an 40 po un ds

. On
Decem be r 1, 20 14
, JB S to ld Gard ea th at he w a s med i cal ly di sq ua li fie d fro m th e

m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic po si ti on du e to hi s pe rm an en t res tri ct i o n s

. JB S of fere d Gard ea si x rep la cem en t job s th at wou ld no t in te rfer e wit h hi s wor k res tri ct io ns

. Gard ea ha d no in te res t in th e job s fo r va rio us reas on s, in cl ud in g pa y , ho ur s, an d job

res po ns ib il it ie s, an d h e tu rn ed do wn ev ery o ffer

. JB S pl aced hi m on m ed ic al lea ve wi t ho ut pa y , st at in g th at he was free to ap pl y fo r ot he r job s as th ey cam e op en

. In st e a d
, Gard ea fo un d ot he r em pl oym en t an d hi s em

pl oym en t wit h JB S en de d

au to m at ic al ly after 1 2 m on th s o n l eav e.

Gard ea fil ed su it ag ai ns t JB S pu rs ua nt to th e Am eri can s wit h Dis ab il it ie s Act (“ ADA”), th e Io wa C i v i l Ri gh ts Act (“ ICRA” ), an d th e Io wa W ag e Paym en t Co ll ect io n Law (“ IWPCL”). Gard ea’s co m pl ai nt co nt ai ne d t w o co un ts : fir st , a fa ilure-t o- acco m

m od at e cl ai m an d a te rm in at io n cl ai m un de r th e ADA an d ICRA, and

se co nd
, an IWPCL cl ai m , al le gi ng th at JB S in te nt io n a l l y f ai le d to pa y Gard ea a
po rti on of h is earn ed wage s. In Marc h 2 01 7, J BS s ou gh t s um m ary jud gm en t o n a ll is su es

. In May 20 17
, th e di st ric t co ur t gr an te d JB S’s m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t. Gard ea ap pe al ed

.

-3

-II

. Dis cus si on

A. St an da rd

of Revi ew

W e rev ie w a gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t de no vo

. Torg ers on v

. C i t y o f
Ro ch es te r, 64 3 F.3 d 10 31
, 10 42 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (en ba nc ). Su m m ary jud gm en t is

pr op er “ if th e pl ead in gs , th e di sc o v e r y a n d d is cl os ur e m at eri al s on fil e, an d an y affi da vi ts sh ow th at th ere is no ge nu in e is su e as to an y m at eri al f a c t a n d t h at th e

m ov an t i s en ti tl ed to jud gm en t as a m at te r of law.” Fe d.R .Civ .P. 56 (c)( 2)

.

B. Fai lu re -to -Acco mmod at e Cl ai m

The fir st co un t of Gard ea’s co m pl ai nt pl ead s a fai lu re-t o- acco m m od at e cl ai m

un de r th e ADA an d ICRA. W e an al y ze ADA an d ICRA di sa bi li ty di s cri m in at io n cl ai m s un de r th e sa m e st an da rd s. Tjern ag el v. Gat es Co rp ., 53 3 F.3 d 66 6, 67 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ).

To pr ev ai l on a fai lu re-t o- acco m m od at e cl ai m , a p l ai nt iff “ m us t fir st m ak e a faci al sh owi ng th at he ha s an ADA di sa bi li ty an d th at he h a s s u f f e r e d [an ] ad ve rs e

em pl oym en t act io n. The n he m us t m ak e a faci al s h o w i n g th at he is a ‘qua li fie d in d i v i d u a l

. ’” Fen ne y v. Dak ot a, Mi nn

. & E. R. Co
., 32 7 F.3 d 70 7, 71 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ). W he n th e em

pl oyee ha s m ad e hi s faci al sh owi ng , “ [t]he bu rd en th en sh ift s to th e em pl oyer to sh ow th at it is un ab le to acco m m od at e th e em

pl oyee.” Id

. (q uo ta ti on

om it te d)

.

1. Dis ab il it y

The ADA de fin es “ di sa bi li ty” as “ a ph y si cal or m en ta l im pa irment t h at

su bs ta nt ia l l y l i mi t s on e or m or e m ajor li fe act iv it ie s of [an ] in di vi du al .” 42 U.S.C. § 12 10 2( 1)

. The Dis tri ct Co ur t hel d th at Gard ea was “ arg ua bl y di sa bl ed ” un de r th e

-4

-ADA, and th eref or e th ere was a ge nu in e is su e of m at eri al fact pre cl ud in g s um m ary ju d g men t on th at is su e. Gard ea v. JB S USA LLC, No. 4: 15 -cv -0 04 74
, 20 17 W L 59 04 67 5 a t * 2, 5 (S.D. Iowa , May 11 , 20 17 ).

JB S arg ue s th at Gard ea is no t di sa bl ed wit hi n th e m ean in g of th e ADA be cau se li fti ng res tri ct io ns do no t su bs ta nt ia ll y li m it an y m ajor li fe act iv it ie s. (Ap pe ll ees ’ Br.

at 24 .) Howev er , l ift in g res tri ct io ns m ay qu al ify as a di sa bi li ty un de r th e ADA
Am en dm en ts Act (“ ADAAA”), whi ch rel ax ed th e req ui rem en ts f o r s h o win g a di sa bi li ty. See Fl ei s h m an v. Co nt in en ta l Cas

. Co
., 69 8 F.3 d 59 8, 60 6 n.3 (7 th Ci r. 20 12 ) se e 42 U.S.C. § 12 10 2( 4) (s ta ti ng “ [t]he de fin it io n of di sa bi li ty in th is ch ap te r sh al l be co ns tru ed in fav or of br oa d co ve rag e”). In th is cas e, th e Dis tri ct Co ur t rel ie d

on Equ al Em

pl oym en t Opp or tu ni ty Co m m is si o n r eg ul at io ns , whi ch br oa de ne d th e de fin it io n of di sa bi li ty in th e wak e of th e A D A A A, in de te rm in in g th at Gard ea’s li fti ng res tri ct io ns arg ua bl y qu al ifi ed as a di sa bi li ty. Gard ea, 20 17 W L 5 90 46 75 at *3

.

W hi le li fti ng res tri ct io ns m ay qu al ify as a di sa bi li ty un de r th e ADAAA, we

ne ed no t m ak e th at de te rm in at io n. As di sc us se d fu rth er b e l o w , ev en if Gard ea is di sa bl ed
, he is no t q u a l i fie d to pe rfo rm th e es se nt ia l fu nc ti on s of hi s job
, an d hi s cl ai m fai ls on th at ba si s.

2. Qua li fic at io n

In or de r to sh ow th at he is a qu al ifi ed in di vi du al un de r th e ADA, Gard ea m us t
pr ov e th at he was a b l e “t o p erfo rm th e es se nt ia l fu nc ti on s of th e po si ti on , wit h or wit ho ut reas on ab le acco m m od at io n.” Hil l v. W al ke r, 73 7 F.3 d 12 09
, 12 16 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

. Ess en ti al fu nc ti on s of th e po si ti on are “ th e fu nd am en ta l jo b d u t i e s o f th e em

pl oym en t po si ti on th e in di vi du al wit h a di sa bi li ty ho ld s or de si res .” 29 C

. F

. R

. § 1 6 30 .2(n )(1 ). Acco m m od at io ns are no t reas on ab le if an

em pl oyer “ can de m on st rat e th at th e ac co m m od at io n wou ld im

po se un du e ha rd sh ip

-5

-on th e op erat io n of th e bu si ne ss .” 42 U.S.C. § 12 11 2( 5) (A). An em pl oyee m us t sh ow th at an acco m

m od at io n is “ reas on ab le on it s face .” U.S. Airwa y s, In c. v. Barn et t, 53 5 U.S. 39 1, 4 01 (20 02 ).

As t he di st ric t cou rt fou nd
, li fti ng is an es se nt ia l fun ct io n o f th e m ai nt en an ce

m ech an ic po si ti on

. The reco rd sh ows th at m ech an ic s m us t ha v e th e ab il it y to li ft ob jects weig hi ng up to 10 0 po un ds
, carr y la dd ers an d m ot or s in ex ces s of 40 po un ds
,
an d freq ue nt ly pe rfo rm li fti ng be twee n 10 an d 50 po un ds

. (J A at 27
, ¶¶ 25 -2 7, 51 7- 51 8, 5 60 .) Gard ea do es no t di rect ly d is pu te th at li fti ng is an ess en ti al fun ct io n, b ut
rat he r ch al le ng es th e fre qu en cy wit h whi ch he av y li fti ng is req ui red in hi s p os it io n. Howev er, “ a ta sk m ay be an ess en ti al fun ct io n e ve n i f th e em pl oyee pe rfo rm s it fo r

on ly a few m in ut es each week .” Mi nn ih an v. Med ia Co m Co m m c’ns Co rp ., 77 9 F.3 d
80 3, 81 2 (8 th Ci r. 20 15 ). The reco rd sh ows th at he av y li fti ng is co m m on pl ace in th e

m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic po si ti on

. The refo re, th e li fti ng of ob jects he av ie r th an Gard ea

can li ft i s an ess en ti al fun ct io n.

G a r d e a al so al le ge s th at hi s li fti ng res tri ct io n co ul d ha ve be en reas on a b l y

acco m m od at ed be cau se (1 ) as si st an ce fro m ot he r m ech an ic s was av ai la bl e an d (2 ) th e

us e o f li ft- as si st in g d ev ic es was a va il ab le

.

Fi rs t, as si st an ce fro m ot he r m ech an ic s is no t a reas on ab le acco m m od at io n.

“ ‘[A] n acco m

m od at io n th at wou ld cau se ot he r em pl oyees to wor k ha rd er, lo ng er, or be de pr iv ed of op po rtu ni ti es is no t m an da te d’ un de r th e ADA.” Id

. at 81 3 (q uo ta ti on

om it te d)

. Bec au se Gard ea’s li fti ng l i mi t a t io ns are so res tri ct iv e, he wou ld req ui re

as sis ta nc e lif tin g m an y co m

m on pl ace ob

jects in vo lv ed in hi s job
, in cl ud in g al l la dde rs

an d m ach in ery. The reco rd refl ect s th at c e r t a i n st or ag e area s are to o sm al l fo r two
pe op le to pe rfo rm a li ft, an d ot he r m ech an ic s are no t al way s av ai la bl e to as si st ot he rs in li fti ng ob

jects

. (J A at 28
, ¶¶ 32 -3 3.) Bec au se th is acco m m od at io n wou ld req ui re JB S to ex te ns iv el y

ch an ge it s p ract ic es an d wo rk en vi ro nm en t, i t i s u nr eas on ab le

.

-6

-Seco nd
, th e acco m m od at io n of lif

t- as sis tin g de vic es is also un reas on ab le in th is si tu at io n. Lift -as si st in g dev ic es req ui re ov erh ead be am s, whi ch are no t fou nd in al l

area s of JB S’s pl an t. (J A at 52 6, ¶ 29 ). Add it io na ll y , ob jects are so m et im es in ti gh t
qu art ers whi ch m ak e s u s e of as si st in g de vi ces im pr act ic al
, an d so m e li ft- as si st in g de vi ces req ui re em

pl oyees to fir st li ft an ob

ject by ha nd on to th e de vi ce. (J A at 52 7, ¶ 30 .) It is ut te rly im

pr act ic al to ex pe ct th at a m ech an ic can fu nc ti on pr op erl y whe n he ne ed s an as si st in g de vi ce to li ft m os t ob je c t s, in cl ud in g la dd ers

. Gard ea’s

pr op os ed ac c om m od at io n is no t reas on ab le on it s face an d wou ld im po se an un du e ha rd sh ip on th e o pe rat io n o f JB S’s bu si ne ss

.

Fi na ll y , Gard ea arg ue s th at t h e rep la cem en t po si ti on s JB S of fere d di d no t
qu al ify as reas on ab le acco m m od at io ns , an d th eref

or e JB Ss di d no t en ga ge i n th e

“ in te ract iv e pr oc es s” as req ui red un de r t h e A DA. See Kall ai l v. All ia nt Ene ge rg y Co rp

. Serv s., In c., 69 1 F.3 d 92 5, 93 3 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 1 2 )

. “ If an em pl oyer ha s of

fere d

reas si gn m en t as a reas on ab le acco m m od at io n, th en th e em

pl oyee m us t of fer ev id en ce sh owi ng bo th th at th e po si ti on of fere d was in feri or to [th e em pl oyee’s] fo rm er job an d th at a co m

pa rab le po si ti on fo r whi ch th e em pl oyee was qu al ifi ed was op en .” Id . a t 93 3 (q uo ta ti on om it te d)

.

The job s JB S of

fere d Gard ea ha d a lo wer rat e of ho ur ly pa y , an d th eref or e m ay be co ns id ered “ in feri or .” Howev er, Gard ea ha s fai le d to sh ow th at a po si ti on

co m pa rab le to hi s m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic job was av ai la bl e. Gard ea cl ai m s JB S di d

no t of fer hi m a la be li ng jo b t h a t he de si red , b ut th e reco rd refl ect s th at th e la be li ng
po si ti on was al read y fil le d an d of fere d an ev en lo wer rat e of pa y th an th e ot he rs JB S of fere d. (J A at 53 4 ¶ 36 .) Bec au se JB S o f f e r e d Gard ea se ve ral job s wit hi n hi s

res tri ct io ns , an d he ha s fai le d to sh ow t h a t o t h e r, m or e co m pa rab le job s were

av ai la bl e, th e di st ric t co ur t w a s co rrec t in ho ld in g th at JB S fai rly en ga ge d in th e in te ract iv e pr oc es s an d it s at te m pt s to acco m

m od at e Gard ea wit h ot he r job s were

reas on ab le

.

-7

-Lift in g is an es se nt ia l fu nc tion of th e m ai nt en an ce m ech an ic po si ti on th at co ul d

no t be reas on ab ly acco m m od at e d
, an d Gard ea ha s fai le d to sh ow th at

ac co m m odat io ns JB S of

fere d were un reas on ab le

. The refo re, Gard ea is no t a qua lif ie d in di vi du al un de r th e ADA and su m m ary jud gm en t i n J BS’s fav or was p ro pe r.

C. Ter min at io n C la im

Gard ea al so arg ue s th a t J B S v i ol at ed th e ADA an d ICRA by pl aci ng hi m on

m ed ic al le av e an d th en te rm in at in g hi m 12 m on th s la te r

. To pr ev ai l on th is cl ai m , Gard ea m us t sh ow “ th at [h e] (1 ) is di sa bl ed wit hi n th e m ean in g of th e ADA, (2 ) is a
qu al ifi ed in di vi du al un de r th e ADA, an d (3 ) ha s su ffer ed an ad ve rs e em pl oym en t de ci si on be cau se of hi s di sa bi li ty.” Tram p v. Ass oc ia te d Und erwri te rs , In c., 76 8 F.3 d
79 3
, 8 0 4 ( 8 t h Ci r. 20 14 ). As an al y zed ab ov e, be cau se Gard ea was no t a qu al ifi ed in di vi du al un de r th e ADA, hi s t erm in at io n c la im als o fa il s.

D. IW PCL Cl ai m

The IWPCL req ui res em

pl oyers in Io wa to pa y al l wag es whe n du e. Io wa Co de § 91 A.8. If an Io wa em

pl oyers in te nt io na ll y vi ol at es it s wag e-p ay m en t ob li ga ti on s, th en “ th e em

pl oyer sh al l be li ab le to th e em pl oyee f o r an y wag es

. . . th at are so in te nt io na ll y fai le d to be pa id

. . . pl us li qu id at ed da mag e s, co ur t co st s an d an y
at to rn ey ’s fees

. . . ” Io wa Co de § 9 1A.8

.

Gard ea cl ai m s th at JB S vi ol at ed th e IWPCL by fai li ng to pa y al l wag es he was du e fro m Ju ly 25
, 20 14 th ro ug h Sep te m be r 12
, 20 14

. Howev er, JB S’s pa y ro ll reco rd s refl ect th at he was pa id co rrec tl y an d an y erro rs in Gard ea’s ho u r s w e r e q u ic kl y

r em ed ie d. (J A at 69 -7 1, 53 9 ¶¶ 43 -4 4.) Gard ea su bm it te d ch art s to s u p p o r t h i s
arg um en t b ut co nc ed es th at th e in fo rm at io n th erei n is fro m hi s own reco ll ect io n.

-8

-(Ap pe ll an t’s Rep ly Br. at 20
, n.4 .) Bec au se m ere al le ga ti on s are in su ffi ci en t to reb ut 3

a p r op erl y su pp or te d m ot io n fo r su m m ary jud gm en t, th e di st ric t co ur t co rrec tl y
gr an te d s um m ary jud gm en t o n t hi s i ss ue

.

II I. Con cl us io n

Fo r th e fo reg oi ng reas on s, we af fir m th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The D i s t r i c t Co ur t st ru ck ha nd writ te n in fo rm at io n on th e ch art s, whi ch 3 Gard ea co nt in ue s t o re ly on, b ecau se it was u nr el ia bl e. (JA at 60 8.)

-9

-