In Goosby v. Kendall, 2022 WL 2666731 (S.D.Ohio July 11, 2022), the court, inter alia, dismissed plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim.
From the decision:
A hostile work environment claim requires proof that (1) plaintiff belongs to a protected class; (2) [plaintiff] was subject to unwelcome harassment; (3) the harassment was based on race; (4) the harassment affected a term, condition, or privilege of employment; and (5) the defendant knew or should have known about the harassment and failed to take action. In determining whether an actionable hostile work environment claim exists, we look to all the circumstances, including the frequency of the discriminatory conduct; its severity; whether it is physically threatening or humiliating, or a mere offensive utterance; and whether it unreasonably interferes with an employee’s work performance. In evaluating these claims, the court will look at whether the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [a plaintiff’s] employment and create an abusive working environment. Thus, occasional offensive utterances do not rise to the level required to create a hostile work environment because [t]o hold otherwise would risk changing Title VII into a code of workplace civility.
In this instance, Plaintiff has failed to allege that he was the subject of severe or pervasive harassment. At most, Plaintiff alleges that Johnson disparaged him during a security clearance investigation, but it is unclear whether Plaintiff was present when these comments were made or when these comments were made. Plaintiff does allege that Johnson initiated the duty time investigation against him in September, gave him a negative appraisal score in November, and issued LWOP and AWOL charges in January. However, Plaintiff does not allege that these actions were physically threatening or humiliating or that they altered the conditions of his employment. Nor does Plaintiff allege the type of constant and pervasive conduct that typifies a hostile work environment claim. … At most, these are occasional instances that have been found to be insufficient to establish a hostile work environment claim. Moreover, Plaintiff simply states as part of his allegations for his other claims that he was subjected to a hostile work environment. This is the type of “unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation” that is insufficient to state a claim. ITherefore, the Court dismisses the Complaint to the extent it asserts a claim for hostile work environment.
[Cleaned up.]
The court did, however, hold that plaintiff sufficiently alleged discrimination, based on his being denied a promotion and subject to discipline.