Stoltman

MEMORANDUM *

Plaintiff Diane Stoltman appeals from the summary judgment in favor of Defendant. We affirm.

1. There is a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Plaintiff was “disabled” within the meaning of Oregon law. However, Defendant presented an alternative argument to the district court, and we may affirm on any ground supported by the record. Solomon v. Interior Reg’l Hous. Auth, 313 F.3d 1194, 1196 (9th Cir.2002).

2. Oregon law requires an employer to make reasonable accommodations to the known limitations of an otherwise qualified disabled employee. Or.Rev.Stat. § 659.436(2)(e) (1999) (renumbered as § 659A.112 in 2001). Defendant complied with all of Plaintiffs requested accommodations except for providing an ergonomic chair. Defendant gave her two headsets, a larger keyboard, assistance with covering her expanded territory, and a paid leave of absence.

With respect to the request for an ergonomic chair, Defendant did not reject the proposed accommodation. Rather, Defendant conditioned supplying the chair on the receipt of a current prescription, which Plaintiff did not provide, and meanwhile proposed a practical alternative by ordering a high-backed chair. This…