United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Robert Blakey, United States District Judge
Calvin Braddock (“Plaintiff”) is a former
employee at Defendant United Parcel Service, Inc.
(“Defendant” or “UPS”). Plaintiff
alleges that in October 2011, he was diagnosed with
Reynaud's Disease, a circulatory disorder that causes the
arteries to undergo exaggerated constriction in response to
cold temperatures, limiting blood flow to the affected areas.
Plaintiff further alleges that he requested a reasonable
accommodation for his condition from Defendant around
November 2012, which Defendant failed to provide.
Plaintiff's sole remaining claim sounds in failure to
accommodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act
(“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et
seq. Defendant moved for summary judgment, and,
for the reasons explained below, that motion  is granted.
began working for UPS as a Data Capture Clerk (“Data
Clerk”) in November 2000.  at 3. Plaintiff's
Data Clerk position is, and has always been, located in the
Air Dock of Defendant's Jefferson Street facility in
Chicago, Illinois. Id. at 4. The Air Dock is a large
building with 26 loading dock doors that open directly to the
outside air throughout the day.  at 3. Plaintiff
testified that these doors are open “constantly,
” throughout his “entire shift.”  at 2.
Trucks park at these loading dock doors to deliver and
receive UPS packages. Id. Plaintiff's work
station was located within 50 feet of the loading dock doors
near several conveyor belts, which are used to move incoming
and outgoing packages throughout the day. Id. at 6.
Plaintiff's job was to retrieve packages from those
conveyor belts, examine them, and process information
relating to the packages on the computer at his work station.
Id. at 4.
temperature in the Air Dock fluctuates, but it most often
resembles the temperature outside. Id. at 3-4.
During the winter months, the thermostat in the Air Dock is
set to 45 degrees. Id. at 5. Once the temperature in
the Air Dock reaches 45 degrees, four industrial heaters
automatically adjust to maintain that temperature.
Id. at 4-5. In light of these conditions, the
written job description for Plaintiff's position
explicitly identifies the ability to work in “variable
temperatures, ” including “inclement weather,
” as an essential job function.  Ex. A.
was diagnosed with Reynaud's Disease by Dr. Irvin Weisman
(“Dr. Weisman”) around October 2011.  at 5.
Reynaud's Disease is a circulatory disorder that causes
the arteries to undergo exaggerated constriction in response
to cold temperatures, limiting blood flow to the affected
areas. Id. At that time, Dr. Weisman also issued a
permanent medical restriction limiting Plaintiff from working
in temperatures below 68 degrees. Id. at 6. In
November 2012, Plaintiff's symptoms flared up, and he
asked UPS to increase the temperature in the Air Dock.
Id. at 7. Although Plaintiff did not use the word
“accommodation” or invoke the Americans with
Disabilities Act specifically, UPS treated his complaint as a
request for accommodation under the ADA. Id.
November 27, 2012, UPS sent Plaintiff a letter regarding the
ADA process and an ADA packet, which was to be completed by a
physician.  at 13. At this point, the most recent medical
documents UPS had regarding Plaintiff's medical condition
were from January 2012. Id. Plaintiff, in
contravention of UPS's request, completed the ADA packet
himself and returned it to UPS. Id. at 14.
attended a “checklist meeting” on January 20,
2013, at which time he requested that UPS adjust the Air
Dock's thermostat to maintain a temperature of 68
degrees. Id. at 15. He proposed no other
accommodations during the ADA resolution process.
Id. UPS nevertheless searched for alternative jobs
for Plaintiff in an area of the Jefferson Street Facility
that remained above 68 degrees at all times.  at 11. This
search was unsuccessful, and Plaintiff has not returned to
work since 2012.
judgment is appropriate if the movant shows that there is no
genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Spurling v. C
& M Fine Pack, Inc., 739 F.3d 1055, 1060 (7th Cir.
2014). A genuine dispute as to any material fact exists if
“the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could
return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson
v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). The
party seeking summary judgment has the burden of establishing
that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact.
See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323
(1986). In determining whether a genuine issue of material
fact exists, this Court must construe all facts and
reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the
nonmoving party. See CTL ex rel. Trebatoski v. Ashland
School Dist., 743 F.3d 524, 528 (7th Cir. 2014).
sole remaining claim is failure to accommodate under the ADA,
which requires an employer to provide “reasonable
accommodations” to the known physical limitations of an
“otherwise qualified individual with a
disability.” 42 U.S.C. § 12112(b)(5)(A). The
parties agree that Plaintiff is disabled under the ADA.
Plaintiff Has Not Defaulted On His Claim
first argues that when Plaintiff failed to return his ADA
packet with information from his doctor, he defaulted on his
failure to accommodate claim because he failed to participate