With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". barrage.” Basker-ville, 50 F.3d at 431. Second, Swadow’s alleged conduct toward Hopkins was sexually neutral or, at most, ambiguous. According to Hopkins, Swadow bumped into him, positioned a magnifying glass over his crotch, flipped his tie over to see its label, gave him a congratulatory kiss in the receiving line at Hopkins’ wedding, and stared at him in the bathroom. Notably, Hopkins has not asserted that Swadow ever made an overt sexual proposition or touched Hopkins in a sexual manner. While Swa-dow’s conduct was undoubtedly tasteless and inappropriately forward, we cannot conclude that it was “of the type that would interfere with a reasonable person’s work performance ... to the extent required by Title VII.” Morgan v. Massachusetts Gen. Hosp., 901 F.2d 186, 193 (1st Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). Third, several of the incidents upon which

A: holding the defendant was not under arrest when police asked him to go to the station and then offered him a ride because he did not have transportation
B: holding that allegations fell short of title vii liability where male plaintiff claimed that male coworker stood behind him and bumped into him while he mopped peeped at him in restroom and asked him to dance at christmas party
C: holding that indictment sufficiently informed defendant of the charge against him so as to enable him to prepare a defense and thus there is no claim that he was surprised at trial
D: holding that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion to substitute counsel on the strength of gonzalezs sworn responses at the pleataking that no one was threatening him or forcing him to plead where the defendant alleged that his attorney forced him to plead guilty  and threatened him if he did not take the plea
B.