Case Name: Lisa LADWIG, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-09-26
Citations: 481 F. App'x 239
Docket Number: No. 12-30180
Parties: Lisa LADWIG, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 481
Pages: 239–240

Head Matter:
Lisa LADWIG, Plaintiff-Appellant v. The BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AND AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 12-30180
Summary Calendar.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Sept. 26, 2012.
Donald Carl Hodge, Jr., Esq., Baton Rouge, LA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Vicki M. Crochet, Esq., Taylor, Porter, Brooks & Phillips, L.L.P., Baton Rouge, LA, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The judgment of the district court is affirmed for the following reasons.
This federal cause of action seeks damages authorized by Titles I and II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12102. Plaintiffs problem is that she has not brought to the court evidence required by law to meet the statutory terms for the legal action. She has not shown evidence of disability, because that means to suffer the limitation of a major life activity; and her sleeping and thinking is not that disabling. Nor has she shown that she is qualified to perform her employment or that she suffered an adverse employment action, even assuming her as-sistantship qualifies as that employment. She fails to present material evidence of denial of accommodation, or any evidence of discrimination or intent to inflict emotional distress.
AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir R. 47.5.4.