must show: (1) participation in a protected activity; (2) subjection to an adverse job action; and (3) a causal connection between the activity and the adverse action. See Matvia v. Bald Head Island Mgmt., Inc., 259 F.3d 261, 271 (4th Cir.2001). Jones has not forecast evidence showing a causal connection between any protected activity and any adverse action taken by Defendants. Accordingly, Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on this claim. D.Constructive Discharge Jones next alleges constructive discharge, in violation of the ADA and Title VII. These claims fail because Jones cannot show that Defendants took “deliberate” actions to make Jones’s working conditions “intolerable” in an effort to force her to resign. Bristow v. Daily Press, Inc., 770 F.2d 1251, 1255 (4th Cir.1985) (<HOLDING>); Martin v. Cavalier Hotel Corp., 48 F.3d 1343,
holding that the employers willingness to accommodate the employee undercut the employees claim of constructive discharge holding that the employers discharge of the plaintiff four months after the plaintiff filed a discrimination claim is insufficient to establish a prima facie case of retaliatory discharge holding that constructive discharge may qualify as a tangible employment action depriving employer of right to assert affirmative defense when a supervisors official act precipitates the constructive discharge recognizing that a constructive discharge claim and a hostile work environment claim are not equivalent because a constructive discharge claim imposes a higher standard holding that plaintiff alleging constructive discharge must prove deliberateness of the employers action and intolerability of the working conditions