Mancini

MEMORANDUM *

Fred Mancini appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Union Pacific Railroad Company (“UPRR”) on his Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) claims. Mancini worked as a signalman for UPRR and suffers from epilepsy, though medication completely controls his seizures. 1 On appeal, Mancini argues *590 that the district court erred in determining that between June 1, 2001, and October 1, 2001, he was neither “actually disabled” under the ADA nor “regarded as having a disability” by UPRR. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

“Because the existence of a ‘disability is a gateway requirement,” EEOC v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 306 F.3d 794 , 797 (9th Cir.2002), our consideration of Mancini’s ADA claim involves three inquires: (1) “we determine whether [Mancini’s epilepsy] is a physical impairment”; (2) “we identify the life activity on which [Mancini] relies, and we determine whether this activity is a major life activity”; and (3) “we determine whether the impairment substantially limits the major life activity.” Fraser, 342 F.3d at 1038. Our analysis is guided by the general principal that a disability determination under…