at the prima facie stage, plaintiff fails to offer any evidence from which a reasonable jury could infer that defendants’ proffered reason was a pretext and that plaintiffs termination was, in fact, the product of a retaliatory motive. Accordingly, because the evidence as a whole is insufficient to sustain a reasonable finding that defendants’ proffered reasons for eliminating plaintiffs position are a pretext for retaliation, plaintiffs retaliation claim is dismissed. 5. Hostile Work Environment Claim Plaintiffs hostile work environment claim is grounded on the conduct by his coworkers recited above, as well as other conduct discussed below. Plaintiff regards this conduct as sufficiently severe or pervasive to satisfy the Title VII standard of a hostile or abusi 100 (2d Cir.1999) (<HOLDING>); see also DelaPaz v. N.Y. City Police Dep’t,
holding that circumstantial evidence may suffice to show that one is a party to an offense holding that a few isolated incidents of harassment and intimidation including menacing telephone calls and a bomb that exploded at the petitioners workplace do not amount to persecution holding that to meet his burden the plaintiff must show more than a few isolated incidents and that evidence solely of sporadic discrimination does not suffice holding that a plaintiff does not make a sufficient showing of a pervasively hostile work environment with a few isolated incidents but must show a steady barrage of opprobrious racial comments holding that to establish a hostile work environment plaintiff must prove more than a few isolated incidents of racial enmity and cjasual comments or accidental or sporadic conversation will not trigger equitable relief pursuant to the statute