Plaintiff Donna McGullum was hired by Cedar Graphics in 1996, and worked in the production department. On September 22, 1999, she complained of sexual harassment, alleging that she “was regularly exposed to sexual comments, sexually explicit matters, sexual jokes, hostile and vulgar language, sexual innuendos and gross behaviors, primarily by male coworkers, including management,”despite her continual complaints to management. She was asked to climb a ladder to retrieve a file and told that no one would look up her skirt. Another coworker once said, “Boing, boing, look at that—right through the denim,” a “reference to the fact that [McGullam’s] hardened nipples were visible even through [her] denim jumper.”On September 22, 1999, after her complaint about harassment, she was transferred to the estimation department of the company, which she said at the time was “on the other side of the building—hopefully far enough away from the hostility, harassment and threats of violence.” On September 11, 2000, she was terminated, and on July 3, 2001, she filed a Title VII, hostile work environment claim with the appropriate agency. The only incident of harassment that she claimed occurred after the transfer in 1999 was that on the opposite side of her cubicle there was a salesman who had numerous conversations with his buddies, during which he made frequent comments about women such as referring to them as “chickies.”On one occasion, he said, in reference to a woman he went out with, that “it wouldn’t be worth it if there wasn’t a sleepover.” The defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, which the district court granted on grounds that could be described as procedural. Looking at the requirements of the statute, explain why the motion was dismissed and whether you believe the dismissal was upheld on appeal. McGullam v. Cedar Graphics, Inc., Docket No. 08-4661 (2d Cir. 2010); available at http:// caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/084661p.pdf? DCMPNWL-pro_labor.