In Huber V

In Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eight Circuit stated that it would follow

A) the EEOC's enforcement guidance that a disabled employee, who can no longer perform the essential functions of her own position, should be reassigned to a vacant position for which she is minimally qualified.
B) the EEOC's enforcement guidance that a disabled employee, who can no longer perform the essential functions of her own position, should be reassigned to a vacant position only if she was the most qualified candidate for the vacant position.
C) the Seventh Circuit's approach that ADA reassignment does not require an employer to reassign a qualified disabled employee to a job for which there is a more qualified applicant, if the employer has a policy to hire the most qualified applicant.
D) the Tenth Circuit's approach that reassignment under the ADA results in automatically awarding a position to a qualified disabled employee regardless whether other better qualified applicants are available, and despite an employer's policy to hire the best applicant.