an impairment substantially limits a major life activity must be made on an individual basis, and that the impaired individual's ability to work must be compared not with "an average persons’s abilities,” ibid., but with the abilities of a person with "comparable training, skills and abilities.” 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(j)(3)(i); see McKay, 110 F.3d at 373; DePaoli v. Abbott Laboratories, 140 F.3d 668, 672 (7th Cir.1998) (the determination whether an individual is "disabled” under the ADA is “an individualized one, and must be determined on a case-by-case basis”). It is obvious that a lifting restriction would substantially limit a manual laborer's ability to work to a far greater extent than it would limit that of an accountant, lawyer, or teacher. See, e.g., Gutridge, 153 F.3d at 900-01 (<HOLDING>). 4 . See McKay, 110 F.3d at 372; Williams, 101
holding that restriction limiting continuous lifting of containers weighing fortyfour to fiftysix pounds does not substantially limit any major life activity holding that a lifting restriction did not substantially limit a computer technicians ability to engage in the major life activity of working holding that a lifting restriction of ten pounds did not constitute a physical impairment that substantially limited a major life activity holding as a matter of law that a permanent twentyfive pound lifting restriction does not constitute a significant restriction on ones ability to lift work or perform any other major life activity holding that a twentyfive pounds lifting restriction did not substantially limit any major life activities