With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". Id.' Moreover, the limitations period begins to run when an employee received notice of the allegedly discriminatory act, not when the consequences of the decision become painful to the employee. See, e.g., Ricks, 449 U.S. at 257, 101 S.Ct. 498; Brewer, 111 F.Supp.2d at 1205. Consequently, Sanders can only litigate his claims arising out of an allegedly discriminatory failure to promote him if he made a proper complaint to the EEOC within 180 days of the promotional decision he seeks to challenge. See, e.g., Morgan, 122 S.Ct. at 2070, 2073. In the present case, Sanders filed his EEOC charge on April 24, 2002. Therefore, the Charge is timely only if the discrete unlawful employment actions of which he complains “occurred” on or after October 26, 2001. See, Morgan, 122 S.Ct. at 2070 (<HOLDING>). The promotion decisions he challenges are

A: holding that a private right of action does not arise until 180 days after a charge has been filed
B: holding that a party must file an eeoc charge within 180 days from the date the unlawful act occurred or lose the ability to recover for it
C: holding the employee had 180 days to file a claim from the date the employee received final definitive and unequivocal notice of an adverse employment action
D: holding that the language of the statute is mandatory and the commission must act within 180 days
B.