Artur, who has a disability, is an employee of banquet & event facilities & services, inc. after the installation of new doors on the entrance to banquet's hall, artur finds it nearly impossible to enter and exit. for repeatedly failing to be on time, banquet replaces artur with carter, who does not have a disability.

Incomplete question. Here's the full part of the question:

*Artur, who has a disability, is an employee of banquet & event facilities & services, inc. after the installation of new doors on the entrance to banquet's hall, artur finds it nearly impossible to enter and exit. for repeatedly failing to be on time, banquet replaces artur with carter, who does not have a disability.

Refer to Fact Pattern 18-2. To successfully defend against Artur's claim, Banquet will have to show that:"

Banquet cannot make changes to the doors without undue hardship to Artur

Explanation:

Their defense is only reasonable if they claim that it acted in the best interest of Artur to replace him since it cannot make changes to the doors without causing him undue hardship because of his disability. Thus the decision was taken to avoid putting him under immense stress.

im thinking a but im not 100% sure

explanation: