for failing to take appropriate action against defendant-appellee Omar Santiago, whose persistent harassment prompted Sanchez to tender her resignation.  We affirm the district court judgment.


2
* BACKGROUND1


3
The pattern of harassment began when Santiago, a PREPA employee, telephoned Sanchez at her office in September 1988 and invited her to dinner.  A few days after Sanchez declined the invitation she received a call from another PREPA employee, informing her that she should expect to hear from Santiago again since he had an ongoing bet that he would succeed in his quest.  Later that month, Santiago approached Sanchez and stated that they should talk.  As Sanchez walked away, Santiago exclaimed that she would see what he was capable of and if she complained about his behavior he wouldsupervisors informed him of PREPA's sexual harassment policy and directed him to keep away from the floor on which Sanchez worked.  Upon encountering Sanchez with another female employee approximately three weeks later, however, Santiago called them lesbians.  Three days later, on December 8, 1988, Sanchez filed her first complaint with the EEOO.


6
On April 14, 1989, following its investigation into the first complaint, the EEOO found that Santiago's conduct constituted sexual harassment, and recommended a reprimand and counselling.  Several weeks later, when Santiago met with supervisors to discuss the EEOO report, he was reminded that sexual harassment was prohibited by law.  Once again he was warned that formal charges would be filed against him for any further harassment and that he was to stay away