Kevin Carter v. Midway Slots and Simulcast, 511 F. App'x 125

Carter served as a security officer and was promoted to dual rate lead officer in 2005.
He was found sleeping on duty on multiple dates, receiving a final warning in 2005 and a one-day suspension in Oct 2006.
In Nov 2005, Dean reported Malin used a racial slur; Carter reported it to HR; Malin denied it but others corroborated some incidents.
Carter alleged race discrimination, retaliation, and hostile work environment under Title VII, with EEOC charges filed in Dec 2006 and Oct 2007.
Carter was terminated on July 26, 2007 for repeatedly sleeping on duty; he filed suit in 2009; district court granted summary judgment in 2012.
The Third Circuit reviewed for substantial questions and summarily affirmed the district court’s decision.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Exhaustion of national-origin claim	Carter exhausted due to EEOC filing covering all claims.	National-origin claim not exhausted; outside EEOC scope.	Unexhausted; dismissed.
Race discrimination prima facie case	Several subordinates committed similar misconduct but were not discharged.	Not similarly situated; different supervisors; no inference of discrimination.	No prima facie case; summary judgment upheld.
Hostile work environment	Multiple racial slurs and harassment over five years.	Allegations are isolated and not pervasive; insufficient to alter terms of employment.	Insufficient to establish hostile environment; summary judgment affirmed.
Retaliation	Adverse actions followed protected activity (EEOC filing and complaints).	Temporal proximity insufficient; no causal link shown beyond Malin's conduct.	No causal connection shown; summary judgment affirmed.

Burgh v. Borough Council of Borough of Montrose, 251 F.3d 465 (3d Cir. 2001) (exhaustion timelines and scope under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5)
Webb v. City of Phila., 562 F.3d 256 (3d Cir. 2009) (exhaustion as prerequisite to Title VII claims)
Goosby v. Johnson & Johnson Med., 228 F.3d 313 (3d Cir. 2000) (McDonnell Douglas framework for discrimination claims)
Jones v. School District of Philadelphia, 198 F.3d 403 (3d Cir. 1999) (elements of prima facie case and reliance on circumstantial evidence)
Pierce v. Commonwealth Life Ins. Co., 40 F.3d 796 (6th Cir. 1994) (similarly situated requirement for comparators)
Andréoli v. Gates, 482 F.3d 641 (3d Cir. 2007) (hostile work environment framework and totality of circumstances)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (Supreme Court 1998) (extreme conduct required for employer liability in hostile environment)
Moore v. City of Phila., 461 F.3d 331 (3d Cir. 2006) (prima facie case and retaliation framework)
Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (Supreme Court 1998) (scope of retaliation and adverse action in Title VII)
Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Breeden, 532 U.S. 268 (Supreme Court 2001) (temporal proximity and causal inference in retaliation)