building of one inference upon another.” Beale v. Hardy, 769 F.2d 213, 214 (4th Cir.1985). Moreover, the existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the nonmoving party’s position is insufficient. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 252, 106 S.Ct. 2505. Rather, the evidence must be such that the fact-finder reasonably could find for the nonmoving party. Id. 1. Disability Discrimination The Rehabilitation Act provides that “[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination ... under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency.” 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). The act imposes upon agencies an oblig 982 (D.N.C.2000) (<HOLDING>). Moreover, "when the major life activity at
holding that breathing is a major life activity within the contemplation of the ada holding that restrictions that plaintiff not lift more than twentyfive pounds or bend repetitively are not evidence of a permanent impairment that substantially limits any major life activity holding that reproduction is not a major life activity recognizing sleeping as major life activity holding that restrictions on bending stooping and squatting do not significantly restrict a major life activity