F ILED U.S. COURT O F APP EALS EL EV EN TH C IRC UIT July 11, 20 06 T HOMA S K. KA HN CLERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN THCIRC UI T

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ N o. 05- 1640 1 & 06- 1047 8 Non-Argum ent Calendar

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ D.C. Dock etNo. 04-011 33-CV- ORL -22KRS LY NN ET TE AN DU JAR S TR AU SS, Pl ai nti ff -Appe llant, ve rs us RENT-A-CENTER, INC., d.b.a . R ent-A- Center, RENT-A-CENTER EAST, INC., f.k.a . Ren t-A- Cen te r, In c., d.b.a . R ent-A- Center, D ef en dants -Appe lle es .

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Appeals fr om

the United State s District Court fo r the Mi ddl e D istri ct

of F lor ida

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ (J ul y 11 , 200 6) Be fo re CA RN E S, P RY O R and C O X , Ci rc uit Jud ge s.2

PE R CU RIA M: Ly nnette Andujar

Strauss appeals the district court’ s grant of summ ary jud gm en t t o Def

en da nt s R en t-A- Cen te r, In c., d.b .a Ren t-A- Cen te r an d R en t-AC e n t e r Ea s t , I n c . , f

. k . aR e n t - A - C e n t e r , I n c . , d . b . aR e n t - A - C e n t e r ( c o l l e c t i v e l y,

“ Rent-A -Center ”) on all of S trauss’ s claim s of retaliation in violatio n of Title V II of the 196 4 C ivi l R igh ts A ct , 42 U . S. C. § 20 00e e t se q. and the F lor ida Ci vil Rights Act of 1992, Fla. Stat. § 760.01 et seq. Str auss also appeals the dis trict co urt’ s de nia l of

he r Ru le 60( b) m oti on f

or r el ie f fr om

the j udgm en t. The district court granted summ ary j udgm ent to Rent-A- Center, holdi ng that Strauss’ s claim s wer e barr ed by res j udicata, a ccord and satisfaction, and judicial estoppel. W e re verse. Stra uss ’ s r et al iatio n c la im s are not barr ed by r es j udi catanor

by a cc or d and satis fa ct ionbe ca

use he r cl ai m s are dis tin ct f ro m tho se c la im s th at

w er e se ttl ed

by the c onse nt d ec re e en te re d by the dis tr ic t c ourt i n th e So uth er n D istri ct of I lli noi s, on O ct obe r 11, 200 2, in W ilfon g, et al. v. Re nt-A- Center , Ci vil A ct ionN o. 00- 680- DRH . As to unnam ed class m em bers, that consent d ecre e re solves o nly sex dis cr im inatio n and s exua l hara ssm en t c la im s; i t do es not a ddr es s any

r et al iatio n act io ns by unn am edcla ss m em be rs .3

W e al so h old

that, und er

the c ir cum stanc es of

thi s c as e, appl ic at ionof

the doc tr ine of

j udi ci al e sto ppe l i s r ev er sib le e rr or . W e do n ot think th is i s ac as e w he re S tr au ss’ s no ndi sc los ur e of he r em plo ym en t a ct ionon h er

Ch ap te r 13 petition wa s “ ‘ shown to have been calculated to m ake a m ockery of the j udicial sy stem .’ ” Burnes v. Pe mc o Aeroplex, Inc. , 291 F . 3d 1 282, 128 5 ( 11th C ir . 200 2) (quot ing Sa lo mon Smi th Barne y, In c. v. Har vey, M.D. , 260 F . 3d 1 302, 130 8 ( 11th Ci r. 2001 )) . S tr au ss w as not suc ce ssf ul i n “pe rs ua din g atr ibuna l t o a cc ep t the earlier positi on, so that judicial ac ceptance of the inconsistent po sition in a later proceeding creates the per ception that either court was misled.” Burnes , 291 F . 3d at 128 5 ( ci tin g Ne w H

am pshi re v . M

ain e , 532 U . S. 742 , 750 -5 1, 121 S . Ct . 180 8, 1815 ( 2001 )) . T his is not ac as e lik e B arge r v . Ci tyof Ca rte rsv ille, G a. , 348 F . 3d 1289 ( 11th C ir . 200 3) , in w hic h th er e w as e vid en ce that: (1 ) the de bto r int en tio na lly

m isl ed the bankr

upt cy c ourt a s to the e xis te nc e an d th enc hara ct er of he r em plo ym en t l aw sui t, and ( 2) the de bto r’ s su cc es s at c onc ea lin g th e tr ue charac ter of her

law suit from

the bankruptcy

court resulted in a bankruptcy court ordered discharge of a ll her debts. T he bankruptcy court never enter ed any

order dis ch ar gin g any

of S tr au ss’ s de bts .4

Fo r the f or eg oin g r ea sons , the dis tr ic t c ourt’ s gr an t of sum m ar y j udgm en t t o Re n t -A -C en t eri s re v er s edan dth e a ct i o ni s re m an d edt o th e d i s tri ctco u rt . We ne ed not a ddr es s S tr au ss’ s a

ppe al of the de nia l of

he r Ru le 60( b) m oti on. REVERSED AND REMANDED.