office away from Mr. Sorenson should be sufficient to defeat TCC’s SJ Motion on Harris’s sexual harassment claims. PI. ’s Response, at 15, Dkt. 22. As TCC points out, Harris’s complaint does not allege a hostile environment claim. Instead, in her complaint, she alleges that she was treated differently than other employees due to her gender. Compl. at 19, Dkt. 1. Harris’s complaint thus contains a discrimination claim based on disparate treatment only, which is clearly distinct from a hostile environment claim. See Meritor Sav. Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57, 68, 106 S.Ct. 2399, 91 L.Ed.2d 49 (1986). A plaintiff may not raise additional claims for the first time through an opposition to summary judgment brief. Gilmour v. Gates, McDonald and Co., 382 F.3d 1312, 1314 (11th Cir.2004); (<HOLDING>); Shanahan v. City of Chicago, 82 F.3d 776, 781
holding issues raised for the first time in a reply brief are not properly before this court holding that issues not raised before the district court cannot be raised for the first time before this court holding that arguments not raised in opposition to a motion for summary judgment are waived holding that claims raised for the first time in an opposition to a motion for summary judgment are not properly before a court holding that an argument raised for the first time in response to defendants motion to dismiss instead of in an amended complaint was not properly raised before the district court and would not be considered on appeal