Chima v. U.S. Dept. of Defense

94 F.3d 650 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. Frank O. CHIMA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; William J. Perry; Robert L. Ketts, Captain; Richard Martin; Fred Ulery; John O'Neal; Elizabeth Miladin, Barbara Giles; Harvey Jansen, Defendants-Appellees. No. 95-55250. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 5, 1996. Decided Aug. 16, 1996. Before: REINHARDT, HALL, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Chima appeals the district court's dismissal of his Title VII claims for failure to exhaust his administrative remedies, and its dismissal with prejudice of his non-Title VII claims on the basis that Title VII is the exclusive remedy for discriminatory employment practices by a federal agency. 3 The government argues that Chima failed to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing suit in district court. In general, employees asserting Title VII claims must first exhaust their administrative…