Molina

Molina v. Los Angeles County

Good Law
58 F. App'x 311
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 27, 2003No. 01-56683; D.C. No. CV-01-00403-FMCCalifornia1,499 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Margaret Molina appeals the district court’s dismissal of her Title VII suit against her employer, Los Angeles County. Because we determine that Ms. Molina has not stated claims cognizable under Title VII, we affirm the district court’s dismissal of her case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We recite the facts only as necessary to explain our decision.

I. Exhaustion

Before filing a Title VII suit in court, a plaintiff is required to exhaust her administrative remedies by presenting a charge to the EEOC. See Sommatino v. United States, 255 F.3d 704, 707 (9th Cir. 2001). A court may not consider incidents of discrimination not included in an EEOC charge unless the non-included claims are like or reasonably related to the allegations contained in the EEOC charge. Sosa v. Hiraoka, 920 F.2d 1451, 1456 (9th Cir.1990).

Ms. Molina exhausted her administrative remedies in this case by filing a charge form with the EEOC on October 6, 2000. She checked off boxes and made statements indicating that she had been discriminated against, retaliated against, and subjected to unlawful harassment from January 1, 1992 through October 6, 2000. The EEOC explicitly…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.