With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". as well. As noted, Plaintiff cannot sue Defendant Wallenstein for a Title VII violation. See Lissau, 159 F.3d at 181. To the extent Plaintiff sues Wallenstein in his official capacity, Plaintiffs section 1983 claims and duplicative state law claims fail in light of Graham. Thus, all but Plaintiffs individual capacity claims against Wallenstein fail as a matter of law. And, as discussed, Plaintiffs residual individual capacity claims against Wallenstein present no triable issues. See supra Part III.A-J. Plaintiffs claims against the Department, per se, fail as a matter of law. The Department is not a legal entity subject to suit. See Rhodes v. Montgomery Cnty. Dep’t of Corrs. & Rehab., Civil Action No. 12-CV-03172-AW, 2013 WL 791208, at *6 (D.Md. Mar. 1, 2013) (citations omitted) (<HOLDING>); cf. Revene v. Charles Cnty. Comm’rs, 882 F.2d

A: holding that probation department employees are not county employees
B: holding that county and district attorneys are officers within the judicial department
C: recognizing that the montgomery county department of correction and rehabilitation is not a legal entity capable of being sued
D: holding county clerk sued in official capacity was entitled to the immunity the county enjoyed
C.