Ex. 37. In it, the plaintiffs husband describes the abusive environment his wife suffered, arguing that it caused her disability. Id. He then adds: As an aside, Mr. David Short, EEO Director, called me once over the summer concerning [the plaintiffs] EEO complaints filed over a year ago. He said he was calling to keep the lines of communication open. To date neither she or I have heard anything from Mr. Short nor anyone from the HHS EEO office. Will HHS continue to delay the investigation of my wife’s complaints? Are the lines no longer open? Def.’s Mot., Ex. 37. Because the plaintiff not only identified the harassment in the letter, but also attempted to impact the future treatment of her claim, the November 2006 letter constitutes a protected activity. See Barnes, 840 F.2d at 976 (<HOLDING>). The June 2007 letter is also a cover letter,
holding that the plaintiff must establish that a supervisors harassment was within the scope of his employment and that the employer failed to respond adequately and effectively when it learned of the harassment holding that an employer must remedy situation of sexual harassment holding that to constitute persecution harm must be more than harassment holding that letters must indicate harassment or attempt to affect future proceedings holding that the harm must rise above mere harassment