With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". A four-year statute of limitations applies to claims brought under § 1981, and thus the Wingate incident is timely and may be considered on summary judgment. See generally Jones v. R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co., 541 U.S. 369, 124 S.Ct. 1836, 158 L.Ed.2d 645 (2004). 11 . Plaintiff also has identified two instances in 2004 where Miller called his employees "black bastards,” and approximately five instances at the beginning of his tenure as general manager, presumably at some point in 2004 when he transferred to Landover, where he commented that the problems he was experiencing in the route department were attributable to the fact that his employees were African-American. (See Doc. No. 63, Holmes Dep. at 23, 81-82, 87.) Carter did not begin working for Miller until 2005 1, 335 (6th Cir.2008) (<HOLDING>). This Court need not take a position on this

A: holding that the court can only consider evidence of other acts of harassment of which a plaintiff becomes aware during the period of his or her employment
B: holding that where the district court dismisses a complaint and provides a stated period within which the plaintiff may amend the order of dismissal  becomes final upon the expiration of the time allowed for amendment the time for appeal is measured from the date on which the district court order of dismissal becomes final
C: holding that the court may only consider the discrete acts that occurred within the appropriate time period
D: holding that the allegations of plaintiffs coemployees of sexual harassment by manager were irrelevant to plaintiffs hostile work environment claim absent evidence that plaintiff was contemporaneously aware of the alleged harassment
A.