Pontinen v. U.S. Steel Corp.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant-employer’s motion for summary judgment in plaintiff-applicant’s action, alleging that defendant’s rescission of its job offer for Utility Person at its plant violated Americans with Disabilities Act. Record showed that after making conditional offer of employment to plaintiff, defendant discovered that plaintiff had uncontrolled seizure disorder and imposed work restrictions that conflicted with essential requirements of Utility Person, that included driving cranes/trucks and working around hazardous equipment. As such, Dist. Ct. could properly conclude that plaintiff’s seizure disorder would pose direct threat to himself and others at defendant’s plant. Ct. rejected plaintiff’s claim that defendant’s imposition of restrictions was based on preconceived notions of seizures and further noted that: (1) record showed that duration of plaintiff’s risk of seizure was indefinite; and (2) nature and severity of potential harm was high given work environment of Utility Person and was likely to occur.