Due to the injury, whether Plaintiff's sustained muscular atrophy which rendered him ("Plaintiff") him disabled under the American Disability Act, 42 US Code 12102 Section (1) (A) which support federal jurisdiction Attached as Ex. A.

Whether Plaintiff Stated states a claim for which relief can be granted based upon defendant position that" Only if Attendance Policy prohibit, defendant attributable to Industrial injuries can plaintiff ("Gamble") succeed on his claim

Whether plaintiffs industrial injuries attached to defendant's brief opposing plaintiffs claim by stating ("Absences approved under Workers Compensation Law will not be counted as absences occurrence") as stated at par's. No. land 2 attached as Ex. B.

Whether defendant harbored animus toward the disability of plaintiff which caused plaintiffs termination because of plaintiffs ADA claim by 1.) Intentionally misclassi'ing plaintiffs approved worker compensation injuries 2...) Causing defendant to voluntary dismissing an appeal in opposition to plaintiff's worker compensation which was obviously approved among other things such as 3.) A long held animus in opposition to plaintiffs previously filed EEOC Charges and 4,) Which extend to a September of 2007, reinstatement with defendant, See Plaintiff's response motion to defendant attached as Ex. C and D. at page ("4") of Bernice B. Donald's dissent.

Whether Plaintiff's sustained muscular atrophy rendered him disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act