to exhaust administrative remedies for her race discrimination claim because she “did not check ‘race’ or ‘color’ as the basis of her discrimination charge, nor does the written explanation in her EEOC complaint describe a suspicion or allegation of discrimination based on race or color”); Bailey v. Verizon Commc’ns, Inc., 544 F.Supp.2d 33, 37-38 (D.D.C.2008) (plaintiff could not bring claims for gender and race discrimination where she only checked the box for age discrimination and noting that “[i]f a plaintiffs EEOC charge makes a class of allegation altogether different from that which she later alleges when seeking relief in federal district court, she will have failed to exhaust administrative remedies”); Hunt v. Disk of Columbia Dep’t of Corr., 41 F.Supp.2d 31, 36 (D.D.C.1999) (<HOLDING>). Plaintiffs only response to this argument is
holding that a plaintiff need not exhaust his administrative remedies to bring a retaliation claim holding that the same standard applies to claims of discrimination based upon gender and age holding that the plaintiff failed to exhaust her administrative remedies with respect to gender discrimination and retaliation claims where she had only asserted discrimination based on race and disability in her eeoc complaint holding that plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies for her gender discrimination claim because she only checked the boxes for age discrimination and retaliation holding age discrimination claim barred