reason for promoting Dixon, and Sabzevari has failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact as to whether this reason is a pretext for discrimination.”). 31 . Cavalier v. Clearlake Rehab. Hosp., Inc., 306 Fed.Appx. 104, 107 (5th Cir.2009) (unpublished) (citing Indest v. Freeman Decorating, Inc., 164 F.3d 258, 264 (5th Cir.1999)); see Faragher, 524 U. ere referred to as "the White girls” in a way that "called into question [the sisters’] racial identity.” However, no deposition testimony or other evidence in the record supports that allegation. Unsubstantiated assertions are insufficient to create a genuine issue of material fact. See QT Trading, L.P. v. M/V Saga Morus, 641 F.3d 105, 111 (5th Cir.2011). 33 . Cf. Septimus v. Univ. of Houston, 399 F.3d 601, 612 (5th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). 34 . Turner v. Baylor Richardson Med. Ctr.,
recognizing a hostile work environment claim under section 1983 holding that a single offensive racist comment was not sufficient to establish a hostile work environment holding that the evidence was insufficient to support the plaintiffs sexbased hostile work environment claim because even though much of the complainedof conduct was boorish and offensive most of it was not personally experienced by the plaintiff holding that certain conduct was irrelevant to plaintiffs hostile work environment claim absent evidence that plaintiff was contemporaneously aware of it holding that the fact that the offensive material was not directed specifically at the plaintiff does not as a matter of law preclude a jury from finding that the conduct subjected her to a hostile work environment based on her sex