With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". v. Smith, 231 F.3d 1301, 1305 (11th Cir.2000). Hunter bears the burden of “offering evidence that the extent of the limitation” caused by the impairment is substantial. Greenberg v. BellSouth Telecomms., Inc., 498 F.3d 1258, 1264 (11th Cir.2007) (internal quotation marks omitted). She contends, with no evidentiary support, that she has substantial impairments in sleep ing, manual tasks, and her general quality of life, including her ability to garden and care for her grandchildren. These amorphous, unsupported assertions, however, are exactly the kind we have dismissed as insufficient in similar cases. See id. (affirming summary judgment when plaintiff put forth no evidence to support his assertions of disability); see also Rossbach v. City of Miami, 371 F.3d 1354, 1358 (11th Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>). For this reason, the district court correctly

A: holding plaintiffs who claimed their ability to walk sit stand and sleep was moderately below average were not disabled
B: holding that plaintiffs inability to stand more than two hours was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that she was disabled
C: holding that plaintiffs inability to stand for more than one hour did not render her disabled
D: holding that evidence that plaintiff could walk only four hours a day was insufficient as a matter of law to prove that she was disabled
A.