that Peter Rodriguez’s conduct negatively affected her ability to work as a CTI sales consultant. See Lee-Crespo, 354 F.3d at 46 (affirming summary judgment for an employer in a hostile environment case where there was no evidence that the conduct caused “an impediment to [the plaintiffs] work performance”). The inappropriate conduct alleged here is similar to conduct which this circuit and others have deemed insufficient to establish a hostile work environment claim. See, e.g., Chamberlin, 915 F.2d at 783 (concluding that it was “highly doubtful” that five sexual advances by a supervisor “could be considered sufficiently severe or pervasive to support a sexual discrimination claim of the hostile environment variety”); Morgan v. Mass. Gen. Hosp., 901 F.2d 186, 192-93 (1st Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>); Burnett v. Tyco Corp., 203 F.3d 980, 984-85
holding that conduct was not sufficiently severe or pervasive where over twoweek period a coworker stood behind the plaintiff to create physical contact surreptitiously looked at the plaintiffs genitals in the restroom and engaged in unwanted touching holding that a single incident in which a coworker squeezed an employees buttocks was not sufficiently severe or pervasive so as to alter the conditions of the victims employment and create an abusive working environment holding that allegations fell short of title vii liability where male plaintiff claimed that male coworker stood behind him and bumped into him while he mopped peeped at him in restroom and asked him to dance at christmas party holding that harassing conduct not sufficiently severe and pervasive where conduct would not have affected the work environment of a reasonable person holding that homosexual advances by male coworker were not sufficiently severe or pervasive to be actionable