Dist. Ct. erred in dismissing plaintiff’s ADA action alleging that defendant terminated him on account of his vision and circulatory problems caused by high blood pressure. While Dist. Ct. found that plaintiff could not establish that he was disabled under ADA because his medical conditions were only transitory, plaintiff’s periodic episodes of blood-pressure spikes and vision loss are covered disabilities, when plaintiff alleged that such episodes substantially impaired two major life activities; i.e., plaintiff’s circulatory function and eyesight. Moreover, plaintiff’s alleged chronic blood-pressure condition could also qualify as disability under 2008 Amendments to ADA, if plaintiff could show that he would be substantially limited in major life activity without taking his medication.