With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". and his supervisor never returned his calls, and never advised him that his extended absence would require him to apply for a leave of absence. According to Plaintiff, a simple investigation into these facts would have revealed a failure to accommodate or grant a leave of absence on the part of Federal Mogul. It is generally accepted that a failure to accommodate is not like or reasonably related to an allegation of termination. Stuart, 217 F.3d at 630 (stating an allegation of discipline is not like or related to an allegation of termination); see Weigel v. Target Stores, 122 F.3d 461, 464 (7th Cir.1997) (finding a complaint of failure to accommodate and termination are separate things not like or reasonably related); Jones v. Sumser Ret. Vill., 209 F.3d 851, 853-54 (6th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). Here, construing the complaint’s allegation

A: holding that default termination is government claim
B: holding that the employers willingness to accommodate the employee undercut the employees claim of constructive discharge
C: holding that although the plaintiff has suffered no adverse employment action she may still raise a claim of discrimination based on the alleged failure reasonably to accommodate her disability
D: holding a termination claim is far different from a failure to accommodate claim
D.