## Facts

- Lanny Bart Jarvis, a USPS employee and Vietnam War veteran, was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and transferred to a custodial position in Utah.
- Jarvis told his supervisor he had PTSD, disliked being approached from behind or touched, and asked that coworkers be instructed not to startle him and to speak to him normally.
- Jarvis had several startle-related physical incidents at work, including striking or kicking a coworker when startled and clenching his fist when startled by a supervisor.
- In a later incident, a coworker poked him while he was obtaining a key; Jarvis hit the coworker’s shoulder and later described himself as “ready to kill” the coworker and stated that if he hit someone “in the right place,” he could kill them.
- USPS placed Jarvis on paid leave, then unpaid leave, and held a due process meeting during an investigation.
- At the meeting, Jarvis stated his PTSD was worsening, he could no longer stop the first blow, and he could not safely return to the workplace; he suggested disability retirement.
- USPS terminated Jarvis, citing concern that he posed a danger to coworkers.
- Jarvis sued under the Rehabilitation Act for failure to accommodate/disability discrimination and for retaliation based on requesting accommodations and engaging in EEO activity.

## Issues

1. Whether Jarvis was a “qualified individual with a disability” under the Rehabilitation Act or was excluded because he posed a “direct threat” that could not be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.
2. Whether Jarvis produced sufficient evidence that USPS’s safety-based reason for termination was pretext for retaliation.
3. Whether the district court resolved all material components of Jarvis’s retaliation allegations at summary judgment.

## Decision

- Affirmed summary judgment for USPS on the Rehabilitation Act disability discrimination/failure-to-accommodate claim.
- Held Jarvis was not a qualified individual because the record supported USPS’s conclusion that he posed a direct threat that reasonable accommodation could not adequately reduce.
- Affirmed summary judgment against Jarvis on most retaliation theories for lack of evidence of pretext.
- Reversed in part and remanded because certain components of the retaliation allegations were not addressed by the district court.

## Legal Principles

- Rehabilitation Act employment claims use ADA standards, including the requirement that a plaintiff be a “qualified individual” able to perform essential job functions with or without reasonable accommodation.
- An employee is not “qualified” if he poses a “direct threat,” meaning a significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.
- In assessing direct threat, an employer may rely on evidence of workplace incidents and the employee’s own admissions about loss of control and risk of harm.
- Retaliation claims under the Rehabilitation Act are evaluated under the McDonnell Douglas framework; once the employer gives a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason, the employee must show a genuine dispute that the reason is pretext.
- A district court must address each material component of a retaliation claim; failure to do so can require remand even when other portions fail on summary judgment.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit held that USPS lawfully terminated Jarvis because the evidence, including his own statements and workplace incidents, supported a direct-threat finding that could not be resolved through reasonable accommodation; it upheld most rulings rejecting retaliation for lack of pretext but remanded discrete retaliation components the district court did not analyze.


Jarvis v. Potter, 500 F.3d 1113 (10th Cir. 2007)