With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". an administrative charge with the EEOC,” Pijnenburg v. W. Ga. Health Sys., Inc., 255 F.3d 1304, 1305 (11th Cir.2001); 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(l), and therefore, although Lewis undoubtedly filed an initial EEOC charge claiming racial discrimination, she never filed a subsequent EEOC charge claiming retaliation for the earlier charge, and, as such, she cannot now bring the retaliation claim this lawsuit. But, contrary to the defendants’ contention, it is settled law that “it is unnecessary for a plaintiff to [file a subsequent EEOC charge before raising in federal court] a retaliation claim growing out of an earlier charge.” Baker v. Buckeye Cellulose Corp., 856 F.2d 167, 169 (11th Cir.1988) (quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Nealon v. Stone, 958 F.2d 584, 590 (4th Cir.1992) (<HOLDING>); Houston v. Army Fleet Services, L.L.C., 509

A: holding that a party may not raise an issue for the first time on appeal
B: holding as such and noting that all other circuits that have considered the issue have determined that a plaintiff may raise the retaliation claim for the first time in federal court
C: holding that an issue raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered by this court
D: holding court did not have jurisdiction to hear plaintiffs retaliation claim where plaintiff did not check the retaliation box or describe anything that indicates such a claim in the eeoc complaint
B.