With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". that the claimant may be entitled to some relief.”). The Original and First Amended Complaints explicitly refer to Plaintiffs having been denied promotions, subjected to a hostile work environment, and retaliated against on the basis of their race. The specific factual allegations included in the Complaints support these claims. The Complaints do not make any general or specific allegations of salary inequities apart from promotion-related differences; the references to pay in the Original and First Amended Complaint are related only to the pay increases accompanying promotions. Such factual averments are not sufficient to allege a separate claim for compensation discrimination. See Richards v. Harper, 864 F.2d 85, 88 (9th Cir. 1988); cf. Swierkiewicz, 534 U.S. at 514-15, 122 S.Ct. 992 (<HOLDING>) (emphasis added); Austin v. Terhune, 367 F.3d

A: recognizing that the distinction between national origin and racial discrimination is an extremely difficult one to trace and holding that plaintiffs allegations of racial discrimination were sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss
B: holding accent discrimination may be actionable as national origin discrimination under title vii citing with approval eeoc guidelines defining national origin discrimination to include discrimination based on the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group
C: holding that plaintiffs complaint which included the ages and nationalities of at least some of the relevant persons involved with his termination was sufficient to provide notice of plaintiffs age and national origin discrimination claims
D: holding that alleged reference to national origin by nondecisionmaker six months prior to plaintiffs termination was the kind of isolated stray remark insufficient without more to raise an inference of discrimination and defeat summary judgment
C.