HEARING OFFICER’S DECISION
Introduction
On January 23, 2004, complainant filed her revised complaint in this matter. That complaint set forth three claims: (1) racial discrimination, (2) retaliation for engaging in protected activity, and (3) sexually hostile work environment.
Respondent subsequently moved for summary judgment. By Memorandum Order dated March 17, 2004, I ruled that complainant could only seek relief in this case for alleged acts of discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment which occurred after December 22, 2002, including her termination in May 2003, and which are not addressed in her pending case in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Complainant’s case came on for hearing on March 15, March 31, April 1, April 2, April 5, April 6, and April 7, 2004. Complainant called thirteen witnesses, and respondent called seven.
At the close of complainant’s case, I granted respondent’s motion to dismiss the hostile work environment claim for reasons stated on the record. (Tr. vol. IV, p. 59, lines 17-19). 1 I also confirmed with complainant’s representative that complainant’s two remaining claims concerned (1) racially disparate treatment as between Ms. Halcomb and [REDACTED], another employee of respondent, and (2) termination of Ms. Halcomb as retaliation for engaging in protected activity. (Tr. vol. IV, p. 71, lines 16-20; Tr. vol. IV, p. 58, lines 19-22; Tr. vol. IV, p. 61, lines 21-22).
Following the hearing, both parties were afforded the opportunity to submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law with citations to the record concerning these claims and to respond to the proposed findings and conclusions of the opposing party. Oral argument was heard on July 21, 2004.
