Employment – Failure to exhaust administrative remedies dooms Title VII suit

Where a federal employee did not file her complaint within 15 days after receiving her right-to-sue notice, her suit was dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Background

Avala Rose appeals the district court‘s order granting defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings on Rose’s second amended complaint alleging violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. She also challenges the district court’s order granting defendant’s motion for leave to amend his answer to include the affirmative defense of failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Amend

A district “court should freely give” parties leave to amend their pleadings “when justice so requires” and “deny such leave only in cases of prejudice, bad faith, or futility,” Here, the district court conducted a careful analysis under the proper legal standard. Accordingly, it did not abuse its discretion in granting defendant’s motion for leave to amend his answer.

Exhaustion

A plaintiff must exhaust her administrative remedies before filing a complaint in federal court alleging violations of Title VII. Relevant here, a federal employee alleging violations of Title VII must first consult with an equal employment opportunity counselor in the employee’s agency. If this informal counseling does not resolve the issue, the counselor must inform the employee in writing of her right to file a formal equal employment opportunity complaint with the agency. After receiving that notice, the employee has 15 days to file a formal equal employment opportunity complaint.

Here, it is undisputed that Rose received the notice of right to file on Feb. 4, 2023. Under the relevant counting rules, then, she had until Feb. 21, 2023, to file a formal equal employment opportunity complaint. It is also undisputed that Rose did not mail her equal employment opportunity complaint until March 6, 2023. Because Rose’s complaint was untimely, the district court correctly concluded that Rose failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.

Affirmed.

Rose v. Steiner, Case No. 26-1093, April 28, 2026. 4th Cir. (per curiam), from EDVA at Richmond (Hudson). Avala Rose, Appellant Pro Se. VLW 026-2-155. 4 pp.

Full-Text Opinion

VLW 026-2-155
Virginia Lawyers Weekly