The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hayes, Judge:
The matter before the Court is the Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Raymond E. Mabus and Colleen Altman. (ECF No. 10).
On September 30, 2012, Plaintiff Addie Colgan initiated this action by filing a Complaint against Defendants Raymon E. Mabus, Secretary of the Department of the Navy, and Colleen Altman, in her individual capacity. (ECF No. 1).
On January 27, 2012, Defendant Mabus filed a Certification of Scope of Employment and a Notice of Substitution of United States as Defendant for all tort claims involving Colleen Altman. (ECF Nos. 10-3, 10-4).
On January 27, 2012, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the Complaint. (ECF No. 10). On February 24, 2012, Plaintiff filed an opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. (ECF No. 11). On March 2, 2012, Defendants filed a reply and filed the Declaration of Jennifer Eichenmuller. (ECF No. 12). On March 6, 2012, Defendants filed a notice of errata and clarification regarding Plaintiff's administrative tort claim. (ECF No. 14).
II. Allegations of the Complaint
Plaintiff was a civilian employee of the Naval Hospital at Camp Pendleton from May 1997 to December 31, 2009. Plaintiff's direct supervisor was Colleen Altman.
In January 2007, Plaintiff filed an EEOC complaint of discrimination against Defendant Altman which was resolved through mediation. "Thereafter, Defendant Altman engaged in a campaign of harassment and intimidation against Plaintiff Colgan, which continued until Plaintiff's forced resignation in December 2009...." (ECF No. 1 at ¶ 11). Specific examples of Defendant Altman's harassing behavior includes:
(a) On many occasions, Defendant Altman refused to permit Plaintiff Colgan to attend Plaintiff's regularly (sic) medically necessary appointments.
(b) On many occasions, Defendant Altman verbally berated Plaintiff Colgan, often in the presence of Plaintiff's co-workers.
(c) On many occasions, after Defendant Altman provided Plaintiff Colgan with specific directions for a particular work assignment, Defendant Altman chastised Plaintiff for not having performed her job correctly. When Plaintiff said she had simply followed Defendant Altman's directions, Defendant Altman became angry and gave Plaintiff markedly different instructions for the particular assignments.
(d) On many occasions, Defendant Altman made disparaging comments about Plaintiff Colgan to Plaintiff's co-workers, including comments about Plaintiff's allegedly unacceptable work performance and alleged excessive absences due to illness.
(e) On many occasions, Defendant Altman told Plaintiff Colgan's co-workers that she was going to "get rid of" Plaintiff.
In March 2009, Plaintiff wrote a letter to her Congressman about the discrimination and harassment occurring in her workplace. As a result of the letter to Plaintiff's Congressman "L.
G. Dundas, Captain, Dental Corps, US Navy, purportedly conducted an investigation into Plaintiff's allegations." Id. at ¶ 13. However, the investigation did not stop the discrimination and harassment. "Defendant Altman was irate [about Plaintiff's complaint to her Congressman] and ... decided to cause Plaintiff's termination or forced retirement." Id. at ¶ 14. "Thereafter ... Defendants Navy, Altman and Does, engaged in a continuous pattern of discriminatory and harassing treatment ...." Id. The discriminatory and harassing treatment by Defendants including following:
(a) The unauthorized disclosure of Plaintiff Colgan's private and confidential information concerning her medical, psychiatric and/or psychological care and treatment obtained at Navy;
(b) The unauthorized discussion and/or dissemination of Plaintiff's private confidential medical, psychiatric and/or psychological information to her supervisors and/or co-workers; and
(c) Subjecting Plaintiff to humiliation and ridicule concerning her medical, psychiatric and/or psychological condition.
Id. at ¶ 15. "[O]n December 31, 2009 Plaintiff Colgan did in fact quit her employment by deciding to take early retirement rather than be subjected to a hostile, intimidating and offensive work environment." Id. at ¶ 16.
Plaintiff asserts the following claims: (1) discrimination and harassment based on disability [29 U.S.C. § 701, et seq.]; (2) retaliation [42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq; 29 C.F.R. § 1630.12]; (3) violation of Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"); (4) violation of privacy [5 U.S.C.A. § 552a(b)]; (5) violation of federal, Constitutional and statutory rights [U.S. Constitution, Sections 1, 5, and 9]; (6) invasion of privacy [California Civil Code § 56, et seq.]; (7) ...