Granados

MEMORANDUM *

Juan Granados appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of his employer, J.R. Simplot Co., on his claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, considering the evidence available to the district court at the time the motion was made, and viewing facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Head v. Glacier Nw., Inc., 413 F.3d 1053, 1058 (9th Cir.2005). Granados contends that the district court erred in holding that he failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that he was disabled at the time of his termination. 1 To qualify as disabled under subsection (A) of the ADA’s definition of disability, 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2)(A), a claimant must prove that (1) he has a physical or mental impairment, (2) the impairment limits a major life activity, and (3) the limitation upon that activity is sub- *549 stantial. See Toyota Motor Mfg., Ky., Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184, 194-95 , 122 S.Ct. 681 , 151 L.Ed.2d 615 (2002). On appeal, Granados argues that the district court overlooked evidence…