Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 115, 122 S.Ct. 2061, 153 L.Ed.2d 106 (2002)). A hostile work environment claim, which was not alleged here, would allow full review because it is likely comprised of a series of repeated acts, some of which may fall outside the filing period. However, “[a]n employer’s denial of a request for a reasonable accommodation,” which is what Dick alleged here, “is a discrete act of discrimination that is an independently actionable unlawful employment practice under the ADA [or the Rehabilitation Act].” Id. at 442 (emphasis added). Thus, because the district court was only considering DSU’s purported denial of Dick’s accommodation request, the district court did not err by failing to considered the entire record. Morgan, 536 U.S. at 114, 122 S.Ct. 2061 (<HOLDING>). C. Adverse Employment Action Dick argues that
holding that an individual could recover for acts occurring outside the statutory time period if at least one act occurred within the time period and the acts were part of the same hostile work environment holding that the court can only consider evidence of other acts of harassment of which a plaintiff becomes aware during the period of his or her employment holding that the court may only consider the discrete acts that occurred within the appropriate time period recognizing an exception to the limitation period where the unlawful employment practice manifests itself over time rather than as a series of discrete acts holding that 42 usc  2000e5el precludes recovery for discrete acts of discrimination or retaliation that occur outside the statutory time period