With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". See id. at 70-71, 107 S.Ct. 367; see also Pinsker v. Joint Dist. No. 28J of Adams & Arapahoe Cntys., 735 F.2d 388, 390-91 (10th Cir. 1984) (upholding trial court’s finding that employer’s leave policy reasonably accommodated employee’s need not to work on several holy days where the policy “jeopardized neither [the employee’s] job nor his observation of religious holidays”). On the other hand, to be, reasonable, an accommodation need not provide a “total” accommodation; that is, Kellogg is not required to guarantee Plaintiffs will never be scheduled for a Saturday shift, nor is Kellogg required to provide an accommodation “that spares the employee any cost whatsoever,” Pinsker, 735 F.2d at 390-91; see also Brener v. Diagnostic Ctr. Hosp., 671 F.2d 141, 146-46 & 146 n.3 (5th Cir. 1982) (<HOLDING>), “[A]ny reasonable accommodation by the

A: holding that employee who frequently missed work was not a qualified individual able to perform the essential functions of her job either with or without a reasonable accommodation as required to support disability discrimination and reasonable accommodation claims under the rehabilitation act
B: holding that although of course an employee is not required to modify his religious beliefs a reasonable accommodation need not be on the employees terms only
C: 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
D: holding defendant was not required to make a reasonable accommodation for an employee because the employee did not apprise defendant that she suffered from a mental impairment
B.