Kendall

MEMORANDUM ***

Roger Kendall appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of the Attorney General of the United States in Kendall’s action for (1) disability discrimination, in violation of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791 , et seq.; and (2) age discrimination, in violation of the Age Dis *529 crimination in Employment Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 621-634 , allegedly committed by his employer, the Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo a district court’s summary judgment, Schnidrig v. Columbia Mach., Inc., 80 F.3d 1406 , 1408 (9th Cir.1996), and we affirm.

To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, Kendall had to provide evidence that: (1) he was disabled within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 791 ; (2) he was otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of his position with or without reasonable accommodation; and (3) an adverse employment decision was made against him solely because of his disability. Kennedy v. Applause, 90 F.3d 1477, 1481 (9th Cir.1996). The district court determined that Kendall failed to show that he was “otherwise qualified” under the…