These statements are clearly sexual in nature and are significantly less ambiguous than the “jealousy” remark that the court relied on in La Day. When the evidence is viewed in the light most favorable to Salinas, a reasonable jury could conclude that Castillo’s sexually charged comments and inappropriate touching of Salinas indicate legitimate sexual desire.

Salinas testified that he was aware Castillo had a wife and multiple children and that Castillo had spoken about his extramarital affairs with women.  Salinas also noted that Castillo would make remarks when an attractive female customer would come in the store and…had once made a crude sexual comment about a female co-worker.  In light of this evidence, a jury may conclude that Castillo intended to harass Salinas but did not act out of genuine sexual desire for him.  It is the jury’s role, however, to weigh the evidence and to make that determination….

Salinas v. Kroger Texas, L.P., Civil Action No. H-14-3153, 2016 WL 561178 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 12, 2016)