Linder

MEMORANDUM **

Following cross-motions for summary-judgment, the district court held that Plaintiff David Linder’s mental impairment did not substantially limit his ability to perform the major life activities of thinking and concentrating and granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant John Potter. We reverse on this narrow issue.

As part of his Rehabilitation Act claim, Linder must show that he suffers a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits his ability to perform major life activities. Gribben v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 528 F.3d 1166, 1169 (9th Cir.2008). We disagree with the district court’s ruling that Linder failed to present a triable issue on whether his limitations were substantial.

First, the court should not have required Linder to present “ ‘more persuasive evidence than otherwise would be necessary to show there is a genuine issue for trial.’ ” (ER Tab 93, at 13 (quoting Wong v. Regents of the Univ. of Cal., 410 F.3d 1052 (9th Cir.2005)).) Wong’s heightened standard applies only when the record as a whole renders the plaintiffs disability claim implausible. See Gribben, 528 F.3d at 1170 n. 2. Unlike the plaintiff in Wong , Linder has not…