Gagnon made it more difficult for her to sell financial products and thereby “altered the terms and conditions of her employment.” Yet the record suggests that these frustrations were shared by many, if not all, of the other agents in the office. Moreover, this type of “sporadic” inconvenience is not sufficiently “severe or pervasive” to meet the demanding test to establish a hostile environment claim. See Faragher, 524 U.S. at 788, 118 S.Ct. 2275 (explaining the justification for the “demanding” requirements placed on hostile environment claims); Nicole v. Grafton School, 181 F.Supp.2d 475, 484 (D.Md.2002) (granting motion to dismiss Title VII hostile environment claim in part because alleged racial slur was not sufficiently “continuous and prolonged”); Jackson, 171 F.Supp.2d at 532 (<HOLDING>). Plaintiff has therefore failed to establish
recognizing that a jury reasonably could find based on an employees complaints to a superior that the employee perceived her environment as hostile holding that ajlthough a continuing pattern of hostile or abusive behavior is ordinarily required to establish a hostile environment a single instance can suffice when it is sufficiently egregious and holding that the plaintiff established that she suffered a sexually hostile working environment where she alleged she was raped by a male coworker holding that plaintiffs allegation that her professor gave her a brief bear hug was insufficient to constitute a hostile work environment holding that plaintiffs allegations of loosely related actions that she perceived to be hostile to her based on her race are insufficient to meet the heavy burden required to prove hostile environment holding that a plaintiffs psychological distress was not vicarious in a hostile work environment case where she experienced her workplace as hostile by reason of the alleged harassment of other women out of her presence