Eddie Stewart v. GES Recycling South Carolina LLC

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 1 of 45 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 24-1523 EDDIE STEWART, Plaintiff – Appellant, v. GES RECYCLING SOUTH CAROLINA LLC, Defendant – Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Jacquelyn Denise Austin, District Judge. (7:21-cv-01782-JDA) Argued: January 31, 2025 Decided: August 13, 2026 Before KING, WYNN, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by published opinion. Judge King wrote the majority opinion, in which Judge Wynn joined. Judge Quattlebaum wrote a dissenting opinion. ARGUED: Geraldine Sumter, FERGUSON, CHAMBERS & SUMTER, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Benjamin Paul Fryer, FORDHARRISON, LLP, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Chandler Bryant, FERGUSON, CHAMBERS & SUMTER, P.A., Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Brianna L. Schill, FORDHARRISON, LLP, Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Appellee USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 2 of 45 KING, Circuit Judge: In this employment discrimination action on appeal from the District of South Carolina, plaintiff Eddie Stewart contests the district court’s Opinion and Order of May 7, 2024, insofar as the court awarded summary judgment to defendant GES Recycling South Carolina LLC (“GES”) on Stewart’s claim of retaliatory discharge under 42 U.S.C. § 1981. See Stewart v. GES Recycling S.C. LLC, No. 7:21-cv-01782 (D.S.C. May 7, 2024), ECF No. 70 (the “Summary Judgment Opinion”). As explained herein, we vacate the award of summary judgment to GES on Stewart’s retaliatory discharge claim and remand for further proceedings. I. Plaintiff Stewart filed the original Complaint in this action on June 14, 2021, asserting three 42 U.S.C. § 1981 claims against GES, for (1) a racially hostile work environment, (2) race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities, and (3) retaliatory discharge for complaining about the discriminatory treatment. The same § 1981 claims are alleged in Stewart’s operative Amended Complaint of June 15, 2021. Following discovery, GES moved for summary judgment as to all three claims. A. The summary judgment record reflects that GES is one of three subsidiaries in the United States of GESCRAP Group, a Spanish multinational corporation engaged in the recycling of industrial metal waste, or “metal scrap.” Plaintiff Stewart, who is African American, was employed as a driver for about four months — from February to June 2017 2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 3 of 45 — at the GES plant in Union County, South Carolina. Stewart’s job involved collecting metal scrap from other sites and hauling it to the GES plant. His work was directed by manager Adam Gordon, as well as by fellow driver Justin Yarbrough (sometimes spelled “Yarborough” in the record), who acted as a foreman. Both Gordon and Yarbrough are white. Also in management at the GES plant were Ander Garcia and the direct supervisor of Gordon and Garcia, Rodolfo Baroja. 1. According to plaintiff Stewart, the GES plant was a workplace where profane language was commonly used by and between workers and management, without objection from either side. But Stewart has protested that the GES plant was also a hostile work environment, where he was subjected to racial harassment that included the unwelcome and repeated use of the exceedingly offensive slur “n*****.” 1 Stewart has recounted multiple instances of racial harassment, mostly perpetrated by or otherwise related to Yarbrough, as detailed below. ● While working on a paid holiday (indicated to be Good Friday, April 14, 2017), Stewart and an African American coworker got in the bed of a pickup truck being driven by Yarbrough, prompting Yarbrough to say, “Man, one of you all come and get in the front, I don’t want to 1 We have sanitized the racial epithet repeatedly encountered by Stewart at the GES plant by replacing that abhorrent term with “n*****.” In so doing, we do not mean to diminish the impact of that slur. See Chapman v. Oakland Living Ctr., Inc., 48 F.4th 222, 225 n.1 (4th Cir. 2022). 3 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 4 of 45 be looking like the n***** slave driver.” See J.A. 79; see also id. at 160-61, 193. 2 ● That same day, Yarbrough told Stewart that a white crane operator had referred to Stewart and other African American drivers as “stupid n*****s.” See J.A. 75, 160, 193. Stewart responded by asking Yarbrough both why the white crane operator had not been fired for his comment and why Yarbrough was “even telling [Stewart] what [the white crane operator] said.” Id. at 77. Although Yarbrough then noted that it was not him, but the white crane operator, who had made the “stupid n*****s” comment, Stewart emphasized that Yarbrough was “the only person I see in my face saying it” and that Yarbrough “better get out of my face with it.” Id. at 78. ● Yarbrough was part of a Facebook group that posted racist cartoons, which Yarbrough repeatedly showed to Stewart and other employees while they were on breaks. One such cartoon, depicting a field full of white horses with one black horse in the middle, was captioned, “Everywhere you go there’s a n*****.” See J.A. 100. Another, depicting a long-legged chicken dressed in a basketball jersey and headband, said something along the lines of, “I’d like to see a n***** catch this chicken.” Id. at 100, 163, 193; see also id. at 332 (copy of cartoon with similar caption, “Bet KFC won’t catch this n***a”). Not wanting to see the racist cartoons, Stewart learned to walk away when Yarbrough was approaching to show them. ● Yarbrough also regularly brought his son (estimated by Stewart to be age 11 or 12) to the GES plant, where on at least three occasions the boy addressed employees gathered in the breakroom, including Stewart, as “sand n*****s.” See J.A. 79-88. The boy’s use of racial slurs caused both African American and white employees to discuss amongst themselves that the boy was “racist” and that Yarbrough was “[r]aising [his son] to be just like him.” Id. at 88. Indeed, Yarbrough would encourage his son’s use of racial slurs, “laugh[ing] as if it[’]s funny.” Id. at 162. 2 Stewart’s version of events is drawn from a written statement he made in June 2017 to GES, see J.A. 193-94; his subsequent intake questionnaire with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, id. at 153-64; and excerpts of his deposition testimony in these proceedings, id. at 66-152, 274-329, 352-59. (Citations herein to “J.A. __” refer to the contents of the Joint Appendix filed by the parties in this appeal.) 4 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 5 of 45 ● In early June 2017, while both Stewart and Yarbrough were working a night shift, Yarbrough flagged Stewart down as if there were something of importance. But Yarbrough then pointed to an oil spot on his arm and said to Stewart: “Look at that. What is that?” See J.A. 77. When Stewart answered that it was “oil,” Yarbrough replied that it was instead “a black spot like you” or “your black ass.” Id. at 77, 91, 162. Prior to June 13, 2017, Stewart did not make any complaints of racial harassment to Gordon or any other managers at GES. As Stewart has explained, management was already well aware that such harassment was occurring — as use of the term “n*****” and other harassing acts often occurred in the presence of the plant’s higher ups — with no effort made to punish or otherwise stop it. For example, Yarbrough told Stewart that the white crane operator’s “stupid n*****s” comment was heard by Baroja, who took no disciplinary action against the white crane operator. See J.A. 160-61. Stewart himself witnessed Yarbrough freely perpetrating harassment with the knowledge and even in the presence of Gordon. Furthermore, Stewart feared that if he complained, he would be subject to retaliation. That fear arose from a warning Gordon had given Stewart on the day Stewart was hired by GES not to associate with two particular African American employees “because they complain about discrimination” and “always talk about the company disc[r]iminates against blacks.” See J.A. 160, 298. Thereafter, Yarbrough advised Stewart that the complaining African American employees would not “be there much longer because they would figure out a way to fire them.” Id. at 160. And Stewart perceived that Gordon was otherwise “targeting” those men for their complaints, in that, for example, one of them lost a promotion to the less-senior Yarbrough, even though the promotion was 5 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 6 of 45 supposed to be based on seniority. Id. at 298-300. Meanwhile, Stewart believed that Gordon was already denying him opportunities, based on his race, to train as a crane operator and thereby qualify for a higher pay rate. As Stewart thus saw it, he “couldn’t complain” to Gordon or “to the people in the office” about racial harassment or other discriminatory treatment. Id. at 298. That is, Stewart “felt like if I had a complaint to them about what was happening they be trying to figure out a way to get rid of me too.” Id. at 357. According to Stewart, however, he was driven to complain of discrimination on June 13, 2017, after Gordon himself perpetrated racial harassment at the GES plant. Stewart’s account of that workday, which quickly ended in his suspension, includes the following details. ● The racial harassment perpetrated by Gordon on June 13, 2017, involved Gordon observing and then imitating two African American employees coming off the day shift who each had greeted Stewart with a fist “pound” as he stood against a wall playing a game on his cell phone while waiting to start his night shift. See J.A. 98. In his imitation, Gordon poked out his bottom lip as if he were “one of the black guys with big bottom lips” and approached Stewart with his fist up “to give [Stewart] the pound.” Id. at 98-99. Stewart refused to participate in a fist pound with Gordon. Instead, Stewart “looked at [Gordon’s] face,” “looked at his hand,” and then “looked back at my game.” Id. at 98. ● Stewart shortly thereafter came across Gordon in the breakroom, where, in the presence of at least one other GES employee, they had words about Stewart’s lack of training as a crane operator. Gordon asked Stewart, “Have you been trained to operate . . . the crane?” See J.A. 133. Stewart responded, “Have you trained me to operate the crane[,] motherfucker?” Id. Gordon acknowledged he had not but challenged Stewart with, “Why you never come in here on your days off and operate the crane?” Id. To that Stewart replied, “Because 6 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 7 of 45 every time I come in on my days off to operate the crane [I instead end up] running my normal job,” which “ain’t what I want.” Id. ● During the same exchange in the breakroom, Stewart alluded to the racial harassment he had encountered at the GES plant — including the harassment just perpetrated by Gordon himself — telling Gordon that “I don’t like being around all you motherfuckers like that ’cause they childish.” See J.A. 133. ● Obviously angered by Stewart’s comments, Gordon left the breakroom but soon called Stewart on his cell phone and told him to come to Gordon’s office. Once Stewart did as instructed, Gordon slammed the office door and ordered Stewart to “[s]it down.” See J.A. 134. Stewart retorted, “I don’t feel like sitting down today, motherfucker.” Id. Gordon then prodded Stewart to “tell me what the problem is,” asking: “What’s going on? What’s wrong?” Id. Stewart suggested that Gordon knew exactly what the problem was — saying, “Man, why you playing me like that?” — but went on to say he was “tired of this bullshit place” and to make express complaints of discriminatory treatment. Id. at 134, 193. ● In his complaints to Gordon on June 13, 2017, Stewart brought up Gordon’s earlier warning to avoid the two African American employees who complained of discrimination. Stewart told Gordon that it had become apparent to Stewart that those employees were “right” to complain, as Gordon “did the same thing to [Stewart].” See J.A. 135. Stewart specifically suggested that his lack of training as a crane operator was racially discriminatory and that Gordon would “not let a black man move up in this company.” Id. at 156-57. Additionally, Stewart protested that “you all got all those people running around here and calling people ‘stupid n*****s’ and stuff, never ain’t nothing been done about that.” Id. at 136. Stewart also expressly complained of Yarbrough’s “n***** slave driver” comment and racist “chicken” cartoon. Id. at 157, 193. ● Stewart closed his discrimination complaints by telling Gordon “it’s real fucked up how the[y] run shit.” See J.A. 157. Gordon responded to Stewart’s complaints by asking if Stewart was “going to quit.” Id. at 136. After Stewart answered, “No,” Gordon directed Stewart to “go ahead and clock out then” and informed him that he was “suspended for the day.” Id. 7 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 8 of 45 ● Upon Gordon’s announcement of his suspension, Stewart noted the unfairness of it, saying to Gordon, “You going to call me in here knowing I was already mad and you going to play me like a kid, and then soon as I tell you what my problem is I get suspended for it.” See J.A. 136. With Gordon leaving the office through the door to the outside, Stewart added, “Man you know that’s messed up.” Id. To that, Gordon “took off running,” prompting Stewart to say, “What you running for” and “You running ‘cause you know you did wrong, man. You know you did wrong.” Id. ● Now outside, Stewart overheard Gordon on the phone, telling a worker who had been scheduled to start later in the night shift to “[c]ome on in [because Stewart has] been suspended for the day.” See J.A. 136-37. That led Stewart to rebuke Gordon: “Damn near be telling people my business. What my business got to do with somebody else?” Id. at 137. Stewart also rebuked: “[H]ow you going to suspend me and you ask me what the problem was and I told you[,] fat mothe[r]fucker. But it[’]s ok for motherfuckers to call us stupid n*****s. You ain’t shit[,] motherfucker.” Id. at 194. ● After rebuking Gordon, Stewart was told to be quiet by a GES employee (identified by GES as Tiffany Robertson) who had also just come outside. Stewart responded to Robertson, “Look, I don’t mean no harm, but you ain’t got nothing to do with this, go the fuck on back in there ’cause I ain’t talking to you.” See J.A. 137. ● At that point, Stewart was approached by Garcia, who asked Stewart what was going on. Stewart explained to Garcia, “Man, that dude [Gordon] playing me like a kid, man,” elaborating that Gordon “called me in the office, ask me what my problem was and I tell him,” but then “suspend[ed] me for telling [him] something that he knew I was already mad about.” See J.A. 137. Additionally, Stewart told Garcia that he was “tired of this shit they doing.” Id. at 194. In response, Garcia instructed Stewart “to go ahead and leave” the GES plant, while promising that Garcia “would talk to [Stewart] tomorrow.” Id. In Stewart’s words, Garcia “calm[ed] me down and t[old] me he w[ould] find out what[’]s going on [and] have me come in the next day and talk to me about it. So I left. I was very very upset.” Id. at 157-58. As Stewart has recounted, he followed Garcia’s instructions and returned to the GES plant on June 14, 2017, though he had not otherwise been scheduled to work that day. 8 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 9 of 45 Stewart met with both Garcia and Baroja, who had Stewart give a written statement regarding the events of June 13, 2017. In that statement, Stewart described: his complaints to Gordon about Stewart’s lack of training as a crane operator; the racial harassment at the GES plant, including Yarbrough’s “n***** slave driver” comment, Yarbrough’s racist “chicken” cartoon, and the unpunished “stupid n*****s” comment that Yarbrough had reported to Stewart; and the retaliation threatened against and suffered by employees who complained of discrimination. The statement also addressed Stewart’s own suspension upon making his complaints to Gordon, as well as the impropriety of the suspension. Stewart was open about his use of profane language, documenting in the statement that, inter alia, he had called Gordon a “motherfucker” and a “fat motherfucker.” At the conclusion of the June 14, 2017 meeting, Stewart was told to call the next day before coming back for that day’s scheduled shift. When Stewart then called on June 15, 2017, he spoke with either Garcia or Baroja, who informed Stewart that he was “still suspended” and would have “to talk to somebody from Spain” who “was flying in to talk to [Stewart].” See J.A. 148-49. Stewart was advised that he should wait to be contacted about a future meeting. According to Stewart, it was not until June 21, 2017, that he was contacted and directed to attend a meeting that same day, with Garcia and another man (identified by GES as Human Resources Manager Oscar Azkona). During that meeting, Garcia and Azkona “spoke [with each other] in another language,” and only Garcia spoke, in English, directly to Stewart. See J.A. 149. Garcia told Stewart, “We understand you had some concerns, but the way you talked to [Gordon] is something this company cannot tolerate; 9 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 10 of 45 and therefore, we have to terminate you.” Id. at 151. Thereupon, Garcia asked Stewart, “You got any questions?” Id. Stewart answered, “No,” and Garcia then provided Stewart with his final pay and had him turn in his uniforms. Id. 2. In a declaration made under penalty of perjury, a witness for plaintiff Stewart, his former coworker Kenrick Denning, averred that while he was employed at the GES plant for approximately one year, “profanity was widely used by workers and management.” See J.A. 330. Denning further stated that “[r]acial jokes and remarks were prevalent during the time that I worked”; that “Gordon made racial remarks himself and was present when racial remarks and jokes were made, but never did anything to warn employees that such conduct was not appropriate”; and that “Gordon was often present when [Yarbrough] made racist remarks.” Id. at 331. According to Denning, “I let it be known that I did not appreciate the racial comments being made” and also “talked about the difference in the pay being offered to African-Americans [including] me.” See J.A. 331. In response, Gordon warned Denning “that if I continued talking about racism that I would be fired” and “told me that I needed to stop talking about the raises.” Id. Ultimately, Denning “resigned my position because of the discriminatory treatment afforded to African-Americans and because the company did nothing to stop the racial comments and jokes.” Id. 3 3 Notably, Denning was one of the two African American employees who Stewart was warned by Gordon to avoid “because they complain about discrimination” and “always talk about the company disc[r]iminates against blacks.” See J.A. 160, 298. 10 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 11 of 45 3. For its part, GES proffered witnesses who disputed plaintiff Stewart’s claims of a racially hostile work environment, race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities, and retaliatory discharge for complaining about the discriminatory treatment. Specifically, GES tendered two declarations of Gordon, a declaration of Garcia, and a declaration of the white crane operator who allegedly uttered the “stupid n*****s” comment. All those declarations were made under penalty of perjury. Additionally, GES produced internal records, including an unsworn and undated written account by Gordon of the events of June 13, 2017, as well as two documents concerning an internal investigation of Yarbrough following Stewart’s termination. In Gordon’s written account of the events of June 13, 2017, once he and Stewart were in Gordon’s office, Gordon felt that Stewart “was attempting to intimidate me” and created “a hostile work environment” by refusing Gordon’s direction to “sit down.” See J.A. 206. Stewart instead “stood in front of my desk,” “began yelling and cursing,” and complained of racial harassment perpetrated by Gordon and in Gordon’s presence, as well as race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities. Id. When Gordon responded to Stewart’s discrimination complaints by contesting them, Stewart “began yelling and cursing again.” Id. Gordon then “asked [Stewart] to leave and go home” and told Stewart that “[h]e was suspended for that shift.” Id. Gordon followed Stewart out of the office, and, once outside, called the replacement worker for Stewart and said that Stewart “would not be working tonight.” Id. “I[n] that moment, [Stewart] stated that he was leaving and was fired,” and Gordon told Stewart “that he was not fired but suspended 11 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 12 of 45 for the night.” Id. To that, Stewart “began yelling and cur[s]ing again, and backed [Gordon] into the barrier wall and against a fence where I felt trapped.” Id. Gordon “was able to remove myself from the situation, and move away from [Stewart].” Id. At that point in Gordon’s written account, Garcia — who the written account refers to as “our CFO” — “and our administration person[ne]l came out of their offices due to the commotion.” See J.A. 206. Garcia “tried to speak calmly with [Stewart] as did one of the administ[rato]rs.” Id. In response, Stewart “began yelling and cursing at those employees” and “calling them names.” Id. Garcia then “calmly escorted [Stewart] around the building and out to the parking lot to leave.” Id. Sometime thereafter, Gordon himself “left for the day” after speaking “briefly with [Garcia]” and being asked “to document what took place.” Id. (suggesting that the written account was prepared in response to Garcia’s request). In contrast to his written account, Gordon’s first declaration contains a much shorter version of the events of June 13, 2017. The first declaration asserts as follows: On or about June 13, 2017, Stewart instigated an altercation with me. Stewart yelled and cursed at me during this altercation. I felt threatened during this altercation because Stewart was physically close to me and he was simultaneously acting in a belligerent manner. Stewart also called an employee, Tiffany Robertson, a “bitch” after she came out to calm Stewart down during this altercation. See J.A. 213. Gordon stated in his first declaration that “Stewart was suspended and subsequently terminated due to this belligerent outburst.” Id. Thereafter, in his second declaration, Gordon specified that “Stewart was solely suspended and terminated due to his tirade against me on June 13, 2017.” Id. at 362. 12 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 13 of 45 Meanwhile, Garcia averred in his declaration that he learned of, but did not witness, “an altercation between Stewart and Gordon.” See J.A. 217. That is, Garcia stated that “I did not witness the altercation, but I did hear [a] commotion at the end of the altercation,” which “made me go out of the office I was in to check on what was going on.” Id. Garcia “learned that the commotion was an altercation between Stewart and Gordon,” and “Stewart was suspended while GES conducted an investigation of the incident.” Id. GES “ultimately decided to terminate Stewart’s employment” because it “simply could not tolerate such belligerent and insubordinate conduct from an employee.” Id. The decision was made by Azkona and Baroja, and Garcia “was the individual tasked with informing Stewart of his termination” during Azkona and Garcia’s June 21, 2017 meeting with Stewart. Id. As for the internal investigation of Yarbrough, the two documents produced by GES reflect that GES opened — and also closed — the investigation on June 22, 2017, the day after Stewart’s termination. By the document opening the investigation, GES notified Yarbrough of an allegation that “[o]n June 14, when you were with 2 companions, you made the following comment[:] ‘Sit one of you in the front part with me that I do not want people think that I’m a slave’s driver.’” See J.A. 203. 4 GES accorded Yarbrough two days “to submit in writing any disclaimers and / or claims you deem appropriate.” Id. The record does not contain a written response from Yarbrough, but according to Garcia’s 4 In the district court proceedings, GES acknowledged that the use of the date “June 14” was apparently “a scrivener’s error” and that the correct date is “April 14, 2017, Good Friday.” See J.A. 52 n.8. 13 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 14 of 45 declaration, “Yarbrough admitted he used the term ‘slave driver’ because was driving with [Stewart and another African American employee] and they were sitting in the back while Ya[r]brough was in the front alone.” Id. at 217. By the document then promptly closing the investigation, GES informed Yarbrough that “[w]e have received your allegations and after analyzing them, valuing your repentance and your trajectory in the Company, we inform you that by this time, the consequences of your action will be limited to written warning.” See J.A. 204. Yarbrough was further advised that “if this type of action is repeated again, we will be obliged to take harder actions.” Id. B. GES’s summary judgment motion was referred to a magistrate judge for recommendations to the district court. By the Report of Magistrate Judge of September 7, 2023, the magistrate judge recommended awarding summary judgment to GES on plaintiff Stewart’s hostile work environment and race discrimination claims, but denying summary judgment to GES on Stewart’s retaliatory discharge claim. See Stewart v. GES Recycling S.C. LLC, No. 7:21-cv-01782 (D.S.C. Sept. 7, 2023), ECF No. 55 (the “Report”). The magistrate judge concluded that the hostile work environment claim fails for, inter alia, being time-barred. See Report 12-13 (quoting Guessous v. Fairview Prop. Invs., LLC, 828 F.3d 208, 223 (4th Cir. 2016), for the proposition that “[h]ostile work environment claims under § 1981 are subject to a four year limitation period”). That is so, the magistrate judge explained, because the relevant acts of racial harassment — mainly 14 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 15 of 45 those allegedly perpetrated by Yarbrough — occurred more than four years before Stewart initiated this action on June 14, 2021. Notably, the magistrate judge considered whether “Gordon’s alleged conduct on June 13, 2017, [could] salvage [Stewart’s] hostile work environment claim and bring it within [§] 1981’s statute of limitations under the continuing violation doctrine.” See Report 14 (recognizing that, under the continuing violation doctrine as elucidated in Guessous, 828 F.3d at 222 (quoting Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 117 (2002)), if “an act contributing to the claim occurs within the filing period,” then “the entire time period of the hostile environment may be considered by a court for the purposes of determining liability”). The magistrate judge determined that Gordon’s alleged conduct could not salvage the hostile work environment claim because that conduct, i.e., Gordon’s imitation of the two African American employees who had just given Stewart fist pounds, did not include any “racial or derogatory comments whatsoever” and thus was not “racially offensive.” Id. As the magistrate judge saw it, “[n]othing in the record — other than [Stewart’s] own interpretation of Gordon ‘poking out’ his lips — suggests that the conduct was based on race.” Id. at 15. Next, the magistrate judge concluded that the claim of race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities fails for, inter alia, also being time-barred. See White v. BFI Waste Servs., LLC, 375 F.3d 288, 291-92 (4th Cir. 2004) (observing that such § 1981 discrimination claims, like § 1981 hostile work environment claims, “are governed by [a] four-year federal statute of limitations”). Here, the magistrate judge explained that — “consistent with the fact that [Stewart] was suspended from June 13, 2017, until his 15 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 16 of 45 termination of employment on June 21, 2017” — he “failed to provide any evidence that he asked to be trained on the crane and was denied the opportunity after June 14, 2017.” See Report 20. Lastly, however, with respect to the indisputably-timely retaliatory discharge claim, the magistrate judge concluded that there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether retaliation was a but-for cause of Stewart’s termination. See Report 22-23 (quoting Guessous, 828 F.3d at 217, for the proposition that “[r]etaliation claims . . . require the employee to show that retaliation was a but-for cause of a challenged adverse employment action” (internal quotation marks omitted)). “Clearly,” the magistrate judge emphasized, “issues of material fact remain.” Id. at 23. C. Following the issuance of the Report on September 7, 2023, the parties timely filed objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendations. Plaintiff Stewart objected to the recommendation to award summary judgment to GES on the hostile work environment claim, but he did not object to the recommendation to award summary judgment to GES on the claim of race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities. GES objected to the recommendation to deny its request for summary judgment on the retaliatory discharge claim. By the Summary Judgment Opinion of May 7, 2024, the district court resolved to award summary judgment to GES on all three of Stewart’s claims. As to the hostile work environment claim, the district court rejected the magistrate judge’s determination that Gordon’s imitation of the two African American employees on June 13, 2017 — which the court referred to as the “Lip Incident” — was not based on race 16 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 17 of 45 or racially offensive. See Summary Judgment Opinion 9 n.6. The court explained that a jury could credit Stewart’s description of the Lip Incident and reasonably understand “that Gordon was mockingly imitating the two African-American men who had just fist bumped [Stewart],” that Gordon “imitated their ‘big bottom lips’ by poking out his lower lip,” and “that Gordon’s imitating the African-American men in this way was racially offensive, especially in light of the hostility that Gordon had expressed in the past concerning African- American employees’ complaints of discrimination.” Id. In any event, the district court concluded that the hostile work environment claim is yet time-barred, in that “[t]he Lip Incident, the last unwelcome and offensive conduct [Stewart] testified that he experienced, occurred on June 13, 2017, which is more than four years prior to [his] filing the Complaint on June 14, 2021.” See Summary Judgment Opinion 9. On that ground, the court awarded summary judgment to GES on the hostile work environment claim. Similarly, the district court awarded summary judgment to GES on the claim of race discrimination in training and promotion opportunities. See Summary Judgment Opinion 8 n.5 (noting the lack of objection to, and adopting, the magistrate judge’s conclusion that the race discrimination claim is time-barred). Turning to the retaliatory discharge claim, the district court disagreed with the magistrate judge’s conclusion that there is a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether retaliation was a but-for cause of Stewart’s termination. Applying the burden-shifting framework of McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973), the court ruled that “even assuming [Stewart] can establish a prima facie case of retaliation” — 17 USCA4 Appeal: 24-1523 Doc: 36 Filed: 08/13/2026 Pg: 18 of 45 particularly because of the close temporal proximity between his discrimination complaints and subsequent termination —Stewart has failed to meet “his burden of demonstrating that GES’s proffered reason [for the termination] is merely a pretext for retaliation.” See Summary Judgment Opinion 12-13. The district court premised its ruling on the proposition that GES has always claimed that Stewart “was