it feared. For example, even though Wal-Mart feared that Nunes might drop a heavy item lifted over her head, there is no evidence that Wal-Mart considered an accommodation to avoid such lifting. Given Nunes’s job duties as a cashier, such an accommodation seems feasible. See Mantolete, 767 F.2d at 1423 (court should consider whether employer could have made reasonable accommodation that would have eliminated or reduced the direct threat of harm); see also 42 U.S.C. § 12111(3). CONCLUSION Nunes has raised genuine issues of material fact concerning whether the medical leave she sought was a reasonable accommodation that would have permitted her to perform the duties of her job without imposing an undue hardship on her employer, and without a direct threat of in 446, 447 (11th Cir.1996) (<HOLDING>). 2 . Interpretations of the ADA are guided by
holding that expansion of the ada to encompass threats to self is untenable because the ada mentions only threats to others holding the ada unmistakably includes state prisons and prisoners within its coverage holding that the defendants purchase of a firearm and ammunition on the same day that he made a threat demonstrates that his threats are more than mere puffery and evidences an intent to carry out the threats holding that criminal threat prohibition was impliedly limited to threats of illegal or unlawful acts holding that direct threat under the ada includes threats to self