FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT N ove m be r 16, 2005 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 04- 15121

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 03 -006 37 -C V -H S -E R O N A L D J A C K S O N R I G B Y , a n in d iv id u a l, P la in tif f - A p p e lla n t, v ersu s S P R I N G S I N D U S T R I E S , I N C ., a c o rp o r a tio n , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( N ove m be r16, 2005) B efo re A N D E R S O N , B L A C K an d C A RN E S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

R on al d Jac kson R i gb y app ea l s the di stri ctcourt ’ s gra ntof sum m ary j u d g m e n tt o S p r i n g s I n d u s tr i e s o n h i s Am e r i c a n Di s ab i l i t i e s Ac tc l a i m . He c o n t e n d s th a th e wa s e n t i t l e d t o a j u ry tr i a l o n b o th h i s 4 2 U. S . C . § 1 2 1 0 2 ( 2 ) ( A) a c tu a l d is ab ility th e o ry a n d h is § 1 2 1 0 2 ( 2 ) ( C ) r e g a r d e d a s d is ab le d th e o ry . T he s ol e i s s ue R i gby r a i s e s i n r e ga r d t o the gr a ntof s um m a ry j udgm e nt a g a in s t h im o n th e a c tu a l d is ab ility th e o ry is th a t a s a n in s u lin - d e p e n d e n t d iab e tic he i s di sabl ed w i thi n the m ea ni ng of § 1 21 02 (2)( A ), because he i s i nel i gi bl e f or a c om m e r c i a l dr i ve r ’ s l i c e ns e . H e m a ke s tha ta r gum e nti n s pi t e of the f a c ttha tthe j ob i n que s t i on, w or ki ng a tS pr i ng I ndus tr i e s ’ m a nuf a c tur i ng pl a nt , i nvol ve s no dr i vi ng of

a ny ty pe . I n a ny e ve nt , R i gby ’ s pos i t i on tha thi s i nabi l i ty t o obt a i n a com m er ci al dri ver’ s l i ce nse r enders hi m di sabl ed for A D A pu rposes i s f orec l osed by ourr e c e ntde c i s i on i n C ol l a do v. U P S , 419 F . 3d 1143, 1157 ( 11th C i r . 2005) ( a n i ns ul i n- de pe nde ntdi abe t i c ’ s i ne l i gi bi l i tyf ora pe r m i tt o dr i ve bi g truc ks , a nd i n ab i l i ty t o b e a fu l l -t i m e d ri v er i s n o ta d i sab i l i ty fo r A D A p u rp o ses); see al so C he now e th v. H i l l s bor ough C ounty , 250 F . 3d 1328, 1329 ( 11th C i r . 2001) ( dr i vi ng i t s e l f i s nota m a

j orl i f e a c t i vi ty ) . T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d note rri n gr a nt i ng sum m ary j ud gm entagai nstR i gb y on h i s a ctual di sabi l i ty theory i nsofaras i tw as b a s e d o n h is in ab ility to h o ld a c o m m e r c ia l d r iv e r ’s lic e n s e , a n d th a t is th e o n ly th e o ry o f a c tu a l d is ab ility h e h a s a r g u e d o n ap p e a l.3

T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id e rr , h o w e v e r , in g r a n tin g s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t a g a in s t R i gb y on h i s § 12 10 2(2)(C ) r egar ded as di sabl ed theory, atl ea ston the grou nd that it u s e d . I t is u n d is p u te d th a t S p r in g s I n d u s tr ie s r e g a r d s R ig b y a s u n ab le to pe r f or m a ny m a nuf

a c tur i ng j ob be c a us e of

the pot e nt i a l s i de e f

f e c t s of hi s us e of L ort ab t o tre atthe pai n thatre sul t s f rom hi s di abet es or i t s c om pl i ca t i on s. D r. H ughe s s t a t e d tha tthe r e w a s no m a nuf a c tur i ng j ob i n the P i e dm onta r e a tha tR i gby co u l d safel y p erfo rm w h i l e t ak i n g L o rt ab , an d th ath as b een S p ri n g s In d u stri es’ p o s itio n th r o u g h o u t th is litig a tio n . T he s ol e pr e m i s e of

the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s gr a ntof s um m a ry j udgm e nton the r e ga r de d a s the ory w a s the pr e m i s e tha tm a nuf a c tur i ng i s nota c l a s s orbr oa d r a nge o f jo b s , w h ic h it m u s t b e f o rR ig b y to b e “s ig n if

ic a n tly r e s tr ic te d in th e ab ility to perf orm ei ther acl as s of j ob s or abroad range of j ob s i n v ar i ou s c l as se s a s com pare d t o the avera ge pers on havi ng com parabl e tra i ni ng , ski l l s, and abi l i t i es . ” M u llin s v . C r o w e ll, 2 2 8 F .3 d 1 3 0 5 , 1 3 1 4 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 0 ) ( q u o tin g 2 9 C .F .R . § 16 30 . 2(j )( 3)(i )) (i nt ernal m arks om i tt ed). A s adeci si on of thi s C ou rt , w hi ch w as i ssu ed aft er th e d i stri ctco u rt ’ s ru l i n g i n th i s case, est ab l i sh es, m an u factu ri n g i s a cl as s of j ob s or abroad range of j ob s f or di sabi l i ty purpo se s. D ’ A ng el o v . C on agra F oods , I nc . , ____ F . 3d ____, N o. 04- 10629 ( 11th C i r . A ug. 30, 2005) ( ge nui ne i s s ue of f a c tw he the rthe pl a i nt i f

f’ s ve r t i go a c tua l l y pr e ve nt e d he rf r om pe r f or m i ng4

vari ou s m anufacturi ng j ob s, or w hether s he w as re garded as un abl e t o p er form th e m , w h ic h w a s m a te r ia l f o rA D A p u rp o s e s ) . I n r e ve r s i ng the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s gr a ntof s um m a ry j udgm e nton thi s gr ound, w e e xpr e s s no vi e w on w he the rs um m a ry j udgm e ntc oul d ha ve be e n gr a nt e d on a n o th e rg r o u n d , s u c h a s th e “o th e rw is e q u a lif ie d ” b a s is , s e e 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 1 2 ( b ) ( 5 ) ( A ) , o ro n a n y “d ir e c t th r e a t” is s u e it e n ta ils , s e e 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 1 3 ( a )

– ( b ) , th a t S p r in g s I n d u s tr ie s h a s a r g u e d o n ap p e a l. W e le a v e th a t a n d a ll othe rque s t i ons note xpr e s s l y a ddr e s s e d i n thi s opi ni on, w he the rthe y r e l a t e t o the ac tual di sabi l i ty theory or the re garded as theory, t o the re sol ut i on of the di stri ct c o u r t in th e f

ir s t in s ta n c e . AF F I R ME D I N P AR T , R E VE R S E D I N P AR T , AN D R E MAND E D.

B L A C K , C i r c ui tJ udge , c onc urr i ng: I c o n c u rin th e r e s u lt.