Ex. 43A, at 10 (investigator questioning Plaintiff as to whether he requested any accommodations); ECF No. 14-48, Ex. 43B, at 150-52 (discussing accommodations requested by Plaintiff and Defendant’s response); ECF No. 14-49, Ex. 44, at 113-18 (testimony of Doina Zuba as to whether Plaintiff requested accommodations)). In addition, the EEOC report following the Investigation discusses the fact that Plaintiff did not request accommodations. (See ECF No. 14-8, Ex. 4, at 5, 7). The court will therefore treat the reasonable accommodation claim as having been properly exhausted. 2. Substantive Claim To establish a prima facie case for failure to accommodate, Plaintiff must show: “(1) that he was an individual who had a 30, 1996 WL 607087, at *4 (4th Cir.1996) (unpublished table opinion) (<HOLDING>). Thus, “[v]ague or conclusory statements
recognizing that employer has notice of limitation when disability manifests itself to the extent that it would be reasonable to infer that her employer actually knew of the disability holding that employer was entitled to discharge employee after he threatened life of his supervisor even if such misconduct was caused by employees disability holding that if all of an employees coworkers knew that he had a heart condition such knowledge would not amount to notice to the employer that the employee was so limited by a disability as to require special accommodations holding that an employers knowledge that an employee was diabetic did not equate to notice that the employees diabetes was so limiting as to be disabling and to require special accommodations holding that an employer cannot be held liable under the ada if it had no knowledge of the employees alleged disability