With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". a protected activity, (2) suffered an adverse employment decision, and (3) there was a causal link between the protected activity and the adverse employment decision.” Neighorn v. Quest Health Care, 870 F.Supp.2d 1069, 1102 (D.Or.2012); Shepard v. City of Portland, 829 F.Supp.2d 940, 965 (D.Or.2011). 1. “Disclosures” under ORS § 659Á.203, As a threshold matter, the Court must decide whether Lindsey’s reports to Booth regarding the computer search and scrub constitute “disclosures” and thus could potentially qualify as pro-teeted activity under ORS § 659A.203. In Bjurstrom v. Oregon Lottery, the Oregon Court of Appeals held that “disclosure” under the whistleblower protection statute includes a report made within an agency or a department. 202 Or.App. 162, 169-70, 120 P.3d 1235 (2005) (<HOLDING>). The court in Bjwrstrom did conclude, however,

A: holding that the actions were not actions of public and general applicability but were actions directed principally and primarily at plaintiffs
B: holding that the title of the statute did not limit the reach of the statute
C: holding that ors  659a030 does not limit the protected actions to extraagency disclosures of wrongdoing
D: holding the fourteenth amendment does not apply to the actions of the federal government
C.