Defendant’s counseling program, Employee Assistance Programs, and leaves of absence programs to Plaintiffs attention, Plaintiff did not contact The Hartford, accept the counseling program phone number, use the Employee Assistance Programs, or take a leave of absence. Alejandro Depo., Vol. I Part 2, at Í6Ó:9-12, 161:22-162:4, 167:21-168:4, 171:17-25. Thus, the undisputed evidence shows that Defendant permitted Plaintiff to take time off work as necessary and offered Plaintiff further accommodations through The Hartford, the counseling program, the Emergency Assistance Programs, and a leave of absence. By offering these accommodations to Plaintiff, Defendant satisfied its obligation under the FEHA to provide reasonable accommodation to Plaintiffs disability. Cf. Kimbro, 889 F.2d at 878 (<HOLDING>). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS summary
holding that teachers request for four months leave was not a reasonable accommodation holding that an employer is not liable where it takes reasonable steps to provide an accommodation and the employee is responsible for a breakdown in the process of identifying a reasonable accommodation holding that the employer must offer a medical leave of absence in order to satisfy the requirement of providing a reasonable accommodation holding that reasonable accommodation does not require the employer to wait indefinitely for the plaintiffs medical conditions to be corrected holding that the disabled individual bears the initial burden of proposing an accommodation and showing that that accommodation is objectively reasonable and that the defendant was entitled to prevail because the plaintiffs proposed accommodation of remaining on unpaid medical leave until another customer service or receptionist position opened up was not a reasonable accommodation under the ada