1983”). Plaintiff states, “Certainly it is violation of my constitutional and human rights and they forced me to leave USAF by destroying my OERs and making false and malicious statements.” (Doc. No. 8 ¶ 46.) He does not, however, specify which of his constitutional rights were violated. Plaintiffs employment discrimination claim fails under Rule 12(h)(1) because the Feres Doctrine bars claims brought by military personnel under Title VII. As a preliminary matter, a federal employee asserting a claim of employment discrimination must name as the defendant the head of the appropriate agency. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16(c) (“...the head of the department, agency, or unit, as appropriate, shall be the defendant.”); Wadhwa v. Sec’y, Dep’t of ans Affairs, 216 F.Supp.2d 446, 452 (E.D.Pa.2002) (<HOLDING>); Urie v. Roche, 209 F.Supp.2d 412, 417
holding individual employees may be liable under title vii holding that title vii of the civil rights act of 1964 provides the exclusive remedy for claims of employment discrimination by federal agencies holding that title vii provides the exclusive judicial remedy for claims of discrimination in federal employment holding that individual employees are not liable under title vii holding that title vii provides a remedy for civilian employees of military departments but not members of the armed forces