42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged retaliatory conduct.

United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Chipotle Services, LLC · filed 2024-12-03(e)(1)

Saifan filed her amended charge within 300 days of that period. Therefore, defendant has not demonstrated a genuine issue of material fact with respect to its defense that the statute of limitations bars plaintiffs’ retaliation claim.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed within 180 days in Georgia; an online inquiry that does not request EEOC action and is not treated as a charge does not satisfy that deadline.

DELGADO v. APPLE GEORGIA LLC · filed 2024-12-05(e)(1)

For these reasons, the Court finds that the July 2022 inquiry should not be treated as a Charge of Discrimination. Delgado did not file her Charge of Discrimination until more than a year after her termination, so her charge was untimely and her Title VII claims are dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an Illinois Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the challenged employment practice; a timely termination does not revive earlier time-barred claims.

Torres v. Loyola University Health System · filed 2024-12-09(e)(1)

Torres’s termination is a discrete discriminatory act that cannot be used to “pull in” otherwise time barred acts—the national origin discrimination and hostile work environment at Loyola from 2013 to 2019, and the failure to provide a reasonable accommodation in November 2017. See id. Torres’s Title VII and ADA claims based on conduct that occurred before the actionable period are time barred and dismissed.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII employment discrimination charge to be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged discrimination.

Langston v. City of Chicago · filed 2024-12-13(e)(1)

Title VII requires a litigant claiming employment discrimination to file his charge with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful discrimination.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a plaintiff in a deferral state 300 days to file an EEOC charge concerning an alleged unlawful employment practice.

Glanville v. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Maryland: Baltimore Police Department · filed 2024-12-31(e)(1)

Therefore, only acts alleged to have occurred between April 29, 2022, and February 23, 2023, are actionable as to Ms. Glanville’s discrimination and retaliation claims under Title VII.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge, but an untimely-filing defense cannot support dismissal when the complaint alleges a timely charge and the filing record remains unresolved.

Milton Mills v. INOVA Health Care Services · filed 2025-01-07(e)(1)

As is relevant here, it is undisputed that an employee may seek redress in federal court for Title VII violations by a Virginia employer only after he files a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... But even if the district court was justified in considering the EEOC charge submitted in support of INOVA’s motion, we find that the court’s dismissal of Mills’ Title VII claims was premature.

An EEOC charge filed more than 300 days after alleged harassment cannot support a hostile work environment claim unless an act contributing to the same hostile environment occurred within that period.

Bowman v. United Way Worldwide · filed 2025-01-08(e)(1)

The continuing violation doctrine therefore does not apply, and Plaintiff’s hostile work environment claim is time-barred.

In South Carolina, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice; earlier hostile work environment acts may be considered if they form a continuing violation with timely acts.

Mann v. LPL Financial LLC · filed 2025-01-13(e)(1)

In South Carolina, the charge must be filed within 300 days after an “alleged unlawful employment practice” occurred. ... Defendant’s motion is granted with prejudice as to Plaintiff’s hostile work environment claims and any claims raised by Plaintiff based on conduct that occurred prior to September 30, 2021, and denied as to Plaintiff’s claims based on conduct that occurred after September 30, 2021.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful action.

Farmer de la Torre v. Catholic Charities of Southern Missouri, Inc. · filed 2025-01-15(e)(1)

Plaintiff’s claims arising prior to February 24, 2023 are untimely by virtue of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) and therefore should be dismissed.

Section 2000e-5 requires a Title VII plaintiff in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged discrimination before bringing a federal claim.

Montgomery v. New York Presbyterian Hospital · filed 2025-01-17(e)(1)

Here, Montgomery did not file a timely administrative charge or plead circumstances warranting equitable tolling.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) sets a deadline for filing an EEOC charge; after it expires, a plaintiff cannot exhaust an omitted claim by filing a new charge.

Perkins v. City of Minneapolis · filed 2025-01-29(e)(1)

As a result, Perkins is time-barred from filing a new EEOC charge based on the events described in the complaint relating to harassment and is incapable of exhausting his administrative remedies pertaining to his harassment claim.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of a discrete discriminatory act.

Vannier v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Services · filed 2025-01-30(e)(1)

Importantly, Title VII imposes a time limit by which plaintiffs must bring their claims: plaintiffs bringing Title VII claims based upon discrete discriminatory or retaliatory acts must file them within the appropriate time period set forth in 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e)(1). Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 122 (2002). In New York State, an aggrieved party must file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days of the occurrence of an unlawful discrimination practice. ... Therefore, the statutory period during which plaintiff may base his discrimination claim begins on or after December 14, 2021. Plaintiff has not alleged that he suffered any adverse employment actions on or after December 14, 2021.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice, or within 300 days if the claim was presented to a state deferral agency.

Scott v. Walmart Inc. · filed 2025-01-30(e)(1)

Title VII requires that an aggrieved party file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC within 180 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred” or within 300 days “if the aggrieved person presented the claim to a state deferral agency.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e)(1). ... To the extent that the Plaintiff’s Title VII, ADA, and ADEA claims are based upon this, or other conduct that occurred before June 11, 2021, they are untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1)’s 300-day charge-filing limit, incorporated into the ADA, bars claims based on older events.

Dieng v. Orkin LLC · filed 2025-02-04(e)(1)

To the extent that the Plaintiff asserts ADA claims based upon these events, these claims are time- barred, because they are based upon events that occurred more than 300 days before the Plaintiff filed his EEOC charge on March 13, 2017.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge within 180 days, and related acts forming one hostile work environment claim can be considered together for that deadline.

Lowe v. Holmes Motors Inc · filed 2025-02-06(e)(1)

A plaintiff alleging a Title VII violation is generally required to file a charge with the EEOC “within [180] days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Read in the light most favorable to Mr. Lowe, the court finds that his 2020, 2021, and 2023 allegations are sufficiently related.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of a discrete discriminatory act in Alabama; earlier discrete acts are time-barred.

Planchard v. USA Healthcare Management, LLC · filed 2025-02-07(e)(1)

Therefore, any discrete acts that are contained in the charge of discrimination that occurred before March 24, 2021, are time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the discriminatory act; New York’s COVID-19 executive orders do not extend that federal deadline.

Shin v. NBC Universal Media, LLC · filed 2025-02-07(e)(1)

Because the 300-day requirement for Title VII claims is a product of federal, rather than state or local law, see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1), the executive orders do not apply to Plaintiff’s time to file an EEOC charge.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1), incorporated into the ADA, requires a timely EEOC charge; the applicable filing window here was 300 days.

Phillips v. White Plains Hospital · filed 2025-02-10(e)(1)

Thus, it is clear from the face of the SAC that Plaintiffs’ ADA claims are time-barred because they failed to exhaust their remedies within the 300-day window required under the statute.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a charge of discrimination to be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Jones v. Neighborhood Stabilization Team City of St. Louis, MO · filed 2025-02-18(e)(1)

Exhaustion is accomplished by filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives an aggrieved person 300 days to file an EEOC charge, measured from when the employment decision is made and communicated.

Oka v. United Airlines, Inc. · filed 2025-02-23(e)(1)

An aggrieved person has 300 days from the date of the discriminatory action to file an EEOC charge. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... The limitations period starts when the employment decision is made and communicated to the employees, see, e.g., Stepney v. Naperville Sch. Dist. 203, 392 F.3d 236, 240 (7th Cir. 2004), and in this case that was in May 2021.

A Title VII charge filed with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act is timely.

MASON v. THE COMPASS GROUP · filed 2025-02-28(e)(1)

Accepting this as true, Plaintiff timely filed the EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1)’s 300-day deadline for filing an EEOC charge applies to ADA discrimination claims in Illinois.

Anthony v. United Auto Workers Local 1268 · filed 2025-03-07(e)(1)

“Because the ADA's enforcement provision expressly incorporates § 2000e–5 of Title VII,” claims for discrimination under the ADA “must be filed within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” ... Anthony has alleged that he first filed EEOC charges against the Union either on May 27, 2020, or June 5, 2020, less than 300 days after he was laid off by FCA on October 8, 2019.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge in a state with an agency that addresses employment discrimination.

Little v. R & L Carriers Shared Services, LLC · filed 2025-03-09(e)(1)

Connecticut has its own employment discrimination agency, the CHRO, therefore the 300–day filing deadline applies to Plaintiff’s Title VII claims.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; when the 180-day filing period has expired and exhaustion is no longer possible, a court may dismiss an unexhausted claim with prejudice.

Morgan v. Bray · filed 2025-03-10(e)(1)

Accordingly, at the time of filing this suit, Morgan had not administratively exhausted her claims, and by the time she eventually filed a complaint with the EEOC, her 180-day deadline had passed. The district court was correct to dismiss her complaint with prejudice because timely exhaustion of her claims alleging misconduct through March 31, 2023, was no longer possible.

In New York, a Title VII claimant must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Borden v. The City of New York · filed 2025-03-10(e)(1)

Here, the offending conduct by Sylvester occurred in April 2020, and is not encompassed in the 300-day period covered by plaintiff’s August 21, 2023 EEOC charge.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice, or within 300 days if the person initially instituted state or local proceedings.

Sattar v. Hennepin Health Care System · filed 2025-03-11(e)(1)

To be timely, a discrimination charge must be filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) within 180 days after the “alleged unlawful employment practice occurred” or within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred if the person initially instituted state or local proceedings.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1), as applied to ADA claims, requires a plaintiff in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Hall v. Reliant Realty Servs. · filed 2025-03-13(e)(1)

In New York, a plaintiff alleging an ADA violation has 300 days from the date of the allegedly discriminatory act to file a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). See Harris v. City of New York, 186 F.3d 243, 247 & n.2 (2d Cir. 1999); 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(e)(1), 12117(a). The District Court correctly concluded that Hall did not meet this 300-day deadline.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an employee to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice when that filing period applies.

Washington v. Sodecia Automotive · filed 2025-03-18(e)(1)

As relevant here, Title VII requires an employee to file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days from the alleged unlawful employment practice. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Based on that date, the last day he could file his EEOC charge was December 19, 2023. According to the briefs, that was the date the charge was filed. As such, his Title VII claims are not time barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; claims outside the charge’s scope cannot be brought after the filing deadline has passed.

TAYLOR v. MONMOUTH MEDICAL CENTER · filed 2025-03-19(e)(1)

As a result, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Title VII and ADEA claims are not fairly within the scope of her EEOC Charge. Moreover, because 300 days have elapsed from the incident, she cannot bring them now.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice; an internal appeal of a discharge does not restart that period.

Sanchez v. Chicago Transit Authority · filed 2025-03-19(e)(1)

The plaintiff must file her EEOC charge within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... First, the law is clear that the 300-day clock starts to run when the discharge decision is made, not when it is reviewed or upheld on appeal.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a claimant who first files with a state or local agency 300 days to file an EEOC charge.

Cox v. Red Hat, Inc. · filed 2025-03-21(e)(1)

Title VII requires a claimant to file an EEOC charge of discrimination within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice if the claimant initially instituted proceedings with a state or local agency. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... In the end, each of Plaintiff’s Title VII and VHRA claims (as limited by Plaintiff) fall within the 300-day lookback period.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a New York Title VII plaintiff 300 days to file an EEOC charge; earlier discrete acts are time-barred.

McBeth v. City of New York · filed 2025-03-28(e)(1)

Any employment practices that occurred before September 12, 2020—300 days before July 9, 2021—are therefore time-barred, absent an applicable exception.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; the 300-day filing period runs from the alleged discriminatory or retaliatory act.

Esaw v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC · filed 2025-03-31(e)(1)

Plaintiff’s termination was within the 300-day statute of limitations for Plaintiff’s EEOC discrimination claims. In other words, Plaintiff’s adverse employment action happened on or after June 12, 2015. Accordingly, because the evidence shows that Plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action and filed an EEOC charge within the 300-day statute of limitations, Plaintiff’s claims are not time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; in New York, claims based on acts more than 300 days before the charge are time barred unless a continuing violation applies.

Nance v. New York Public Interest Research Group, Inc. · filed 2025-03-31(e)(1)

Therefore, any claims which arose prior to June 23, 2021 (300 days before the date of filing of his charge with the EEOC) are time-barred under Title VII and cannot be considered by the Court unless saved by an action that took place after June 23, 2021 that was a part of Defendants’ purported discriminatory policy or practice.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) bars Title VII claims arising from discrete conduct more than 300 days before the EEOC charge.

Beatty v. New York City District Council of Carpenters and Joiners of America · filed 2025-03-31(e)(1)

Accordingly, claims arising from conduct that occurred before January 5, 2022 (i.e., 300 days before Plaintiff filed her charge of discrimination) are time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) barred a Title VII claim when the EEOC charge was filed more than 300 days after the challenged act.

Hernandez v. Golden Gate Regional Center · filed 2025-04-08(e)(1)

Consequently, Hernandez was required to have filed a charge with the EEOC no later than 300 days after July 7, 2022, namely, May 3, 2023. ... As the above three dates are all beyond May 3, 2023, however, Hernandez's Title VII claims, in the absence of an exception to the statute of limitations, are time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a separate, timely EEOC charge for each discrete discriminatory or retaliatory act; in New York, the filing period is 300 days.

Hawley v. DDSO · filed 2025-04-16(e)(1)

Each one of these alleged incidents is a discrete act or occurrence that triggered its own 300-day filing requirement under Title VII.

In a deferral state, a Title VII claimant must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of a discrete discriminatory act to recover for that act.

Searcy v. TTEC Services Corporation · filed 2025-04-21(e)(1)

“In deferral states such as Texas, an aggrieved party must file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC within 300 days after the alleged unlawful practice occurred.” ... Accordingly, the court concludes that Searcy cannot recover under Title VII or the ADEA for denials of training opportunities or any other conduct that took place before March 6, 2021, except to the extent that she relies on these allegations to support her hostile work environment claim.

In a deferral state, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of a discrete discriminatory act.

AHNERT v. LEHIGH VALLEY HEALTH NETWORK · filed 2025-04-24(e)(1)

Thus, LVNH argues, and the Court agrees, that for purposes of Title VII, any discrete acts of gender discrimination, hostile work environment or retaliation that occurred prior to May 12, 2023 are barred by the 300-day statute of limitations.

In the District of Columbia, § 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a Title VII claimant 300 days to file an EEOC charge.

Thomas v. District of Columbia · filed 2025-05-02(e)(1)

Yet she did not file her administrative charge with the EEOC until April 20, 2022, after the 300-day window to do so before bringing a Title VII claim and the one-year statute of limitations for a DCHRA claim.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) permits Title VII claims based on conduct within 300 days before an EEOC charge in New Jersey.

Sorokina v. The College of New Jersey · filed 2025-05-05(e)(1)

Sorokina’s Title VII claims were timely as to conduct that occurred on or after June 20, 2018—i.e., within 300 days of her April 16, 2019, EEOC charge.

A Title VII claimant in Arizona must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice, unless the deadline is equitably tolled.

Eshetu v. Amazon Human Resource · filed 2025-05-08(e)(1)

All told, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint reveals that she untimely filed her EEOC charge after the 300-day deadline. Plaintiff has not demonstrated that this deadline should be equitably tolled, and therefore, dismissal is warranted.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge when the EEOC or claimant institutes proceedings with an authorized state or local agency.

Glover v. Lutheran · filed 2025-05-28(e)(1)

As nothing has been provided to the contrary, the court will assume Glover’s charge was transmitted to the PHRC. Thus, Kocian compels this court to deny SpiriTrust’s motion to dismiss Glover’s Title VII claim as it was filed within 300 days of the alleged discrimination.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a person who files with a state or local agency 300 days to file an EEOC charge challenging an employment practice.

O'REILLY, Ph.D. v. THE INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RESEARCH · filed 2025-05-29(e)(1)

Title VII and the PFPO require an individual seeking to challenge an employment practice to file a complaint with the EEOC and the PCHR within 300 days after the alleged unlawful practice occurred. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e)(1); Phila. Code. §§ 9-1112(1), (3). Dr. O’Reilly dually filed a complaint with the EEOC and the PCHR on August 31, 2023 (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 5, 83; id. at 28–44), so the 300-day lookback period dates back to November 4, 2022.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) permitted the Title VII charge filed within 180 days of the claimant’s termination.

MADISON v. COLQUITT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT · filed 2025-06-09(e)(1)

Because Madison filed his EEOC Charge within 180 days of his termination—the discriminatory act underlying his Title VII claims—those claims are not time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Spates v. Benjamin · filed 2025-06-11(e)(1)

However, the most recent conduct at issue — the plaintiff’s termination on February 28, 2023 — took place more than 300 days before he filed the charge. (Id.) This means that the plaintiff has not exhausted his administrative remedies for the defendants named in the EEOC charge, or for those that he named for the first time in the complaint.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives an ADA claimant 300 days to file an EEOC charge when a state agency filing extends the deadline in a deferral state.

Futch v. Freedom Preparatory Academy, Inc. · filed 2025-06-12(e)(1)

And this state filing extends the time to file with the EEOC to 300 days.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) barred the sexual harassment claim when it did not qualify for the continuing violations doctrine.

Long v. Kerecis LLC · filed 2025-06-12(e)(1)

Since Long’s sexual harassment claim is not protected under the continuing violation doctrine, it is untimely.

In Maryland, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge to be received within 300 days after the challenged act.

Hawbaker v. New Benevis Smiles, LLC · filed 2025-06-24(e)(1)

Further, in Maryland the charge must be filed within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred. ... Because Hawbaker alleged Defendants’ discriminatory conduct regarding her sex/pregnancy occurred on or around September 13, 2022, her EEOC Charge would need to have been received by July 10, 2023 to be considered timely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) barred allegations where the EEOC charge was filed more than 300 days after the challenged act.

Callender v. New York State Department of Motor Vehicles · filed 2025-06-27(e)(1)

Accordingly, because Plaintiff failed to file his EEOC complaint within 300 days after this allegedly unlawful act, his allegations are untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge when the state agency has authority to provide relief, even if the claimant files first with the EEOC under a worksharing agreement.

Tamakloe v. Vertex Aerospace, LLC · filed 2025-07-02(e)(1)

Where the state and the EEOC have a workshare agreement, the 300-day deadline applies even when a plaintiff files first with the EEOC.

A Title VII charge may be timely under the 300-day filing period when the allegations support an inference that the employee learned of the adverse decision within that period.

Brantley v. American Airlines, Inc. · filed 2025-07-03(e)(1)

So American’s assertion that Brantley must have learned in October 2021 that she wouldn’t be returning to work assumes too much to compel the dismissal of any of her claims at this juncture.

A timely EEOC intake questionnaire requesting agency action can serve as a Title VII charge, and later charges curing defects can relate back to its filing date.

Singh v. Universal Protection Service, LLC · filed 2025-07-11(e)(1)

Singh’s 2023 charges, for which he received the right-to-sue letters, constitute amendments to his timely 2021 charges and relate back to the 2021 filing date.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act; the period begins when the employee knows or reasonably should know of the act.

Spann v. FedEx Freight · filed 2025-07-15(e)(1)

Spann’s Title VII claim is clearly time-barred. She filed her EEOC charge more than 180 days from the date of the forklift accident.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed with the EEOC within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Wilson v. Arkansas Department of Human Services · filed 2025-07-16(e)(1)

Ms. Wilson’s Title VII claim is also time-barred insofar as it relies on the pay disparity between her and Mr. Gaston. A Title VII charge must be filed with the EEOC “within one hundred and eighty days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred . . . .”89 As stated above, Mr. Gaston and Ms. Wilson stopped performing equal work for unequal pay in August of 2019. But Ms. Wilson did not file her charge with the EEOC until December of 2021.90 And “[t]he timely filing of a charge of discrimination with the EEOC is a prerequisite to court action under Title VII.”91 Accordingly, any Title VII claim reliant on the pay disparity between Ms. Wilson and Mr. Gaston is time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1), as incorporated into Title I of the ADA, requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of each alleged discriminatory act.

Sanger v. NVR, Inc. · filed 2025-07-17(e)(1)

Under Title I, Sanger had to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of each alleged act of discrimination. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(e)(1), 12117(a); Williams, 364 F. Supp. 3d at 601. ... Thus, the court dismisses any claim under the ADA concerning discrete acts of discrimination that occurred before September 3, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a plaintiff who first initiates state or local agency proceedings 300 days after an alleged incident to file an EEOC charge.

Dawn Hayes v. Clariant Plastics & Coatings USA, Inc. · filed 2025-07-18(e)(1)

A Title VII plaintiff who first initiated proceedings with a state or local agency must file her EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged incident. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e). ... Thus, because the most recent incident of sexual harassment alleged by Hayes occurred before June 30, 2017, more than 300 days before she filed her EEOC charge, Hayes’s hostile work environment claim is time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e) requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act; an allegation is not dismissed as untimely when it could have occurred within that period.

Pena v. Alabama Department of Public Health (CONSENT) · filed 2025-07-23(e)

“To be timely, the charge ha[s] to be filed within 180 days after the alleged discriminatory act.” Id. at 769–70 (citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)). ... Therefore, the Court finds that ADPH has not at this time carried its burden to show this particular allegation is time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discrimination before bringing a Title VII action.

Williams v. Mississippi Department of Public Safety · filed 2025-07-07(e)(1)

Before filing an action under Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires plaintiffs “to exhaust their administrative remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the [EEOC] within 180 days of the alleged discrimination.”

In a deferral state, a Title VII claimant must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Pell v. The Yonkers City School District · filed 2025-07-24(e)(1)

Only conduct occurring on or after August 9, 2022, falls within the applicable 300-day window.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge to be filed within 300 days for an ADA employment claim brought under its procedures.

Ordonye v. Clement · filed 2025-07-29(e)(1)

A charge is timely if filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged ADA violations, and a suit is timely if filed within 90 days of receiving a right-to-sue letter. ... Because Plaintiff’s charge letter was sent after August 12, 2024, he could not have timely filed it with the EEOC.

In a deferral state, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory employment action.

Eddy v. International Business Machines Corp · filed 2025-07-30(e)(1)

Therefore, the Court finds that Eddy’s EEOC charge is timely as to the alleged adverse employment action that she suffered on April 4, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives an employee 300 days to file an EEOC charge when the employee first initiates proceedings with a state or local agency authorized to grant relief.

Johnson v. Johnson County, Kansas, Board of Commissioners · filed 2025-07-31(e)(1)

Under Title VII, if the employee plaintiff initiates a proceeding with a state or local agency that has authority to grant relief from the alleged unlawful practice, then the plaintiff has three-hundred days to file an EEOC charge regarding that unlawful act.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge in Florida to be filed within 300 days of the discriminatory act; dual-filing with the state agency does not extend that deadline.

Williams v. The City of Daytona Beach · filed 2025-08-05(e)(1)

Dual-filing claims with the FCHR and EEOC that are time-barred by Title VII but not by the FCRA does not render the Title VII claims timely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment action.

Nicklin v. Costco Wholesale Corp. · filed 2025-08-06(e)(1)

For charge to be timely, the alleged discriminatory action must have occurred on or after September 26, 2018 (300 days before Plaintiff filed his Unperfected Charge). Therefore, Nicklin’s ADEA and Title VII claims that occurred prior to September 26, 2018, are time barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the discriminatory event.

Thomas v. Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District · filed 2025-08-14(e)(1)

Prior to initiating a Title VII action, a plaintiff must file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days of the event giving rise to the cause of action. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Since Plaintiff filed the Charge on September 25, 2024, the relevant 300-day period preceding the Charge-filing date began November 30, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge when the plaintiff first institutes proceedings with an authorized state or local agency.

Fisher v. Valley Stream Central High School District · filed 2025-08-27(e)(1)

Title VII requires the plaintiff to file a “charge” with the EEOC within either 180 or 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice, with the longer timeframe applying when a plaintiff has first instituted proceedings with a state or local agency with authority to grant or seek relief. ... Here, the parties agree that the 300-day limitations period applies.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Rush v. Thompson · filed 2025-08-28(e)(1)

An employee who wishes to sue for discrimination under Title VII or the ADEA must first exhaust her administrative remedies by filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC “within 180 days after the alleged unlawful practice occurred.” 29 U.S.C. § 626(d)(1)(A) (ADEA); 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) Title VII). ... Her claims under the ADEA and Title VII relating to her demotion are clearly barred due to her failure to exhaust.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a Title VII claimant 300 days to file an EEOC charge when the claimant first files with an authorized state or local agency.

Garcia v. Westhampton Primary Care · filed 2025-08-30(e)(1)

The Second Amended Complaint alleges that Garcia initially filed a complaint with the New York State Division of Human Rights; accordingly, the 300-day limitations period applies.

In a non-deferral state, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Johnston v. Dunlap & Kyle Company, Inc. · filed 2025-09-05(e)(1)

Thus, on the plain language of the statute, any “alleged unlawful employment practice” must have “occurred” on or after May 13, 2022 (“within one hundred and eighty days” of November 9, 2022). See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the challenged employment action when the 300-day filing period applies.

Gehlaut v. N.Y.C. Dep't of Educ. · filed 2025-09-08(e)(1)

Because Gehlaut filed his first charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) on July 20, 2020, and waited more than three years after the June 2019 reassignment before filing suit, we agree with Johnson and the DOE that Gehlaut’s federal, state, and city claims based on that reassignment are untimely. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (300-day time limit to file an EEOC charge); N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214(2) (three-year statute of limitations for NYSHRL claims); N.Y.C. Admin. Code § 8–502(d) (three-year statute of limitations for NYCHRL claims); N.Y. Educ. Law § 3813(2-b) (one-year statute of limitations for claims against the DOE).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge: generally within 180 days, extended to 300 days when state law proscribes the practice and the charge was initially filed with a state deferral agency.

Akpan v. Holy Cross Health, Inc. · filed 2025-09-10(e)(1)

In order to maintain an action under Title VII, a plaintiff must file an administrative charge with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged misconduct. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). This period is extended to 300 days “when state law proscribes the alleged employment practice and the charge has initially been filed with a state deferral agency.” Williams v. Giant Food Inc., 370 F.3d 423, 428 (4th Cir. 2004). Maryland has such a statute.

In New York, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged discrimination, and a state COVID-19 tolling order does not extend that federal deadline.

Zablauskas · filed 2025-09-16(e)(1)

The parties agree that Plaintiff had 300 days from September 1, 2019, or until June 27, 2020, to timely file a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. ... However, Plaintiff did not file his charge with the EEOC until August 24, 2020. As such, his Title VII claims are untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of each discrete discriminatory act.

Asemota · filed 2025-09-16(e)(1)

Therefore, each discrete discriminatory incident must be individually analyzed to determine timeliness, and all acts that occurred prior to November 2021 are time-barred.

In Illinois, a Title VII plaintiff has 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice to file an EEOC charge; an allegation of timely filing can defeat an exhaustion defense at the motion-to-dismiss stage.

Alsayiri v. Crucial MDH · filed 2025-09-17(e)(1)

The 2022 Charge was assigned Charge No. 560-2022-1600 and was filed on April 23, 2022, well within the 300-day filing window of Alsayiri’s termination on March 17, 2022. ... Alsayiri alleges that he submitted a charge to the EEOC on April 23, 2022. The record, as presented, does not invalidate that allegation. Thus, under a faithful application of Rule 12(b)(6), the Court must reject Defendants’ exhaustion defense.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a claimant 300 days to file an EEOC charge for the alleged harassment at issue here.

Kinloch v. International Longshoremen's Association Local 1422 · filed 2025-09-19(e)(1)

Plaintiff filed her EEOC charge on March 28, 2022, and 300 days prior to that was June 1, 2021. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) bars a Title VII claim when the EEOC charge is filed more than 180 days after the alleged discriminatory act.

Smith v. Tapley · filed 2025-09-19(e)(1)

Moreover, Smith’s Title VII claim against the City for issuing the Form 219 is time-barred because he was issued the Form 219 on November 23, 2021 and he filed his EEOC charge on August 7, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) required the plaintiff to file his Title VII charge within 300 days of the alleged discrimination; earlier hostile-work-environment conduct was timely only if the violation continued into that period.

Socorro-Prospero · filed 2025-09-22(e)(1)

Socorro-Prospero filed his charge on April 29, 2022, Dkt. 1 at 3,which means that allegations occurring more than 300 days before that date (i.e., July 3, 2021) are time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) bars claims based on discrete discriminatory acts outside the applicable EEOC charge filing period, but those acts may serve as background evidence for a timely claim.

Mustafa v. Ford Motor Co. · filed 2025-09-24(e)(1)

Of these, only Mustafa’s termination falls within the applicable limitations period, which means it is the only discrete discriminatory act that may independently support his Title VII claim. ... Although time-barred, discrete acts cannot form the basis of liability, we may still consider them “as background evidence in support of a timely claim.” Id. at 113.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1)’s 300-day deadline for filing an EEOC charge applies to ADA employment discrimination claims through the ADA’s enforcement provision.

Barnes v. The Board of Education of the City of Chicago · filed 2025-09-27(e)(1)

Thus, the limitations cutoff applies against any claim that arose more than 300 days before Barnes filed his EEOC charge.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an employee to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of each discrete discriminatory act.

Abdelbaki v. Rectors and Visitors of the University of Virginia · filed 2025-09-29(e)(1)

However, Abdelbaki fails to allege he raised his discrimination claims with the EEOC within the 300 days required by the law.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) sets a deadline for filing an EEOC charge after each discrete discriminatory act; a continuing-violation theory does not save an untimely discrete act without a longstanding policy of discrimination.

Lucas v. Henry Ford Health System · filed 2025-09-29(e)(1)

The continuing violation doctrine does not save Lucas’s claims with respect to her October 21, 2021 attempted termination.

Section 2000e-5(e)’s deadline for filing an EEOC charge is subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling.

Taylor v. United Parcel Service, Inc. · filed 2008-12-30(e)

However, “filing a timely charge of discrimination with the EEOC is not a jurisdictional prerequisite to suit in federal court, but a requirement that, like a statute of limitations, is subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling.” Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 455 U.S. 385, 393 (1982). In light of our determination that Taylor’s other claims were timely, the district court should examine on remand whether Taylor’s Title VII claims were also timely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a plaintiff who files with a state or local agency 300 days after the alleged discrimination to file an EEOC charge.

Jacoby v. Bethlehem Suburban Motor Sales · filed 2011-05-17(e)(1)

The ADEA and ADA require that a plaintiff file a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory conduct if the plaintiff has filed a complaint with a local or state agency, such as the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (“PHRC”). ... Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiffs claims, to the extent they pertain to actions predating the 300 day period for filling, are time barred.

Section 2000e-5 requires a Title VII plaintiff to file a discrimination charge with the EEOC before pursuing a discrimination claim in court.

Gu v. Presence Saint Joseph Medical Center · filed 2014-06-09

But he does not point to evidence that he filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC or the Illinois Human Rights Commission, see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5; 775 III. Comp. Stat. 5/7A-102(A)(1), (C)(4); Tyson v. Gannett Co., 538 F.3d 781, 783 (7th Cir.2008); Lynch v. Dep’t of Trans., 365 IlLDec. 747, 979 N.E.2d 113, 118-19 (2012), that he was employed by the hospital, see Buckner v. Atl. Plant Maint., Inc., 182 I11.2d 12, 230 IlLDec. 596, 694 N.E.2d 565, 569-70 (1998); New Horizons Elees. Mktg., Inc. v. Clarion Corp. of Am., 203 Ill.App.3d 332, 149 IlLDec. 5, 561 N.E.2d 283, 285 (1990), or that any of the defendants were state actors, see Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. 614, 619-20, 111 S.Ct. 2077, 114 L.Ed.2d 660 (1991); Morfin v. City of E. Chicago, 349 F.3d 989, 1003 (7th Cir. 2003).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

In re Archdiocese of Milwaukee · filed 2014-08-06(e)(1)

An alternative theory would be Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e, et seq. But that statute carries a prerequisite of filing a charge with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(l). There is no evidence that such a charge was filed in this case.

In Illinois, a discrimination charge must be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful conduct.

Edwards v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation · filed 2016-09-22(e)

In Illinois, an individual complaining of discriminatory conduct under the ADA, ADEA, Title VII or the Rehabilitation Act, must file a complaint with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful conduct. ... Plaintiffs ADEA claim is untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge to be filed within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Wheeler v. Bank of New York Mellon · filed 2017-06-14(e)(1)

In any event, even if the charge had been filed in January 2016, a discriminatory act that took place in September 2015 would clearly be timely. See McGullam v. Cedar Graphics, Inc., 609 F.3d 70, 75 (2d Cir. 2010) ("Title VII's administrative exhaustion provision requires that any complaint be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act.” (citing 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(l))).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; failure to file within the applicable 300-day period bars the Title VII claims.

Gianesini v. The Boeing Company · filed 2021-05-14(e)(1)

Plaintiff now concedes that his “federal claims cannot proceed due to [a] procedural deficiency for lack of filing with the [Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] within 300 days.” Response (docket no. 19 at 17); see 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e-5(e)(1), 12117(a). The Second, Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, and Ninth Causes of Action are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to timely exhaust.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Cobbins v. BRG Hospitality Group LLC · filed 2025-09-30(e)(1)

Title VII requires a plaintiff to exhaust administrative remedies by filing a Charge of Discrimination with the EEOC “within [180] days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1); see Ernst v. Methodist Hosp. Sys., 1 F.4th 333, 337 (5th Cir. 2021). In this case, Plaintiff has satisfied the jurisdictional requirement, receiving a Notice of Right to Sue, and timely filing his suit.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed within 300 days; the period begins when the employee learns or should learn of a final employment decision.

Estes v. University Of Cincinnati · filed 2025-09-30(e)(1)

But it was not until February 2023 that UC “ma[de] and communicate[d] a final decision to” Plaintiff regarding the outcome of the “sham” investigation. United Parcel Service, Inc., 249 F.3d at 561 (emphasis added). Thus, this element of both of Plaintiff’s Title VII claims (Counts IV and V) survives an initial screening for timeliness.

In New York, a Title VII plaintiff must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged discrimination before bringing suit.

Jean v. The Department of Education of the City of New York · filed 2025-09-30(e)(1)

As such, even relying on the acts that occurred in October 2021, Plaintiffs were required to file a charge with the EEOC in August 2022, i.e., 300 days from when Defendant’s alleged discriminatory conduct began. Plaintiffs fail to allege that they did so.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged violation, extended to 300 days when proceedings are first instituted with a state or local agency.

Stone v. Charles Schwab & Company Incorporated · filed 2025-10-06(e)(1)

For an EEOC charge to be timely, it ... must be filed within 180 days of the alleged violation, unless the complainant initially ... institutes proceedings with a state or local agency, in which case the EEOC charge must ... be filed within 300 days of the violation.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) extends the EEOC charge-filing period to 300 days when a claimant first starts proceedings with a state agency that enforces its own discrimination laws.

Coleman · filed 2025-10-16(e)(1)

However, because the plaintiffs first instituted proceedings with a state agency that enforces its own discrimination laws, the period for filing EEOC claims is extended to 300 days.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a plaintiff in a state with a discrimination statute to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of each discrete discriminatory or retaliatory act.

Payne · filed 2025-10-17(e)(1)

Defendants correctly argue that any discrete acts of discrimination or retaliation before August 7, 2023, are time barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a claimant who first files with an authorized state agency 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice to file an EEOC charge.

Makere v. Allstate Insurance Company · filed 2025-10-29(e)(1)

Here, because Makere initially instituted a proceeding be- fore the FCHR, which had authority to grant relief, he had 300 days from the discriminatory or retaliatory act’s occurrence to file an EEOC charge.

In a deferral state, § 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a discrimination charge to be filed within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Aguilera · filed 2025-11-04(e)(1)

In “deferral states” like Oklahoma, where a state agency has authority to investigate employment discrimination, the statute requires claimants to file a charge of discrimination within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment discrimination.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) generally requires an EEOC charge within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Mitchell v. Perdido Trucking · filed 2025-11-18(e)(1)

Under Title VII, a charge generally must be filed with the EEOC within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). Mitchell filed his EEOC charge on June 15, 2023. Thus, his charge was timely as to any discriminatory conduct that occurred on or after December 17, 2022, 180 days preceding June 15, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a plaintiff in a deferral state to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of an alleged unlawful employment practice.

Calvert · filed 2025-12-11(e)(1)

Charge 1, dated March 13, 2023, can therefore only support claims based on acts that occurred on or after May 17, 2022. That excludes the plaintiff’s sole allegation supporting his sex-discrimination claim: that he was subject to “probing questions” about his sexual preferences and personal life in January 2022.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII discrimination charge to be filed within 300 days of the alleged unlawful practice in a state with a qualifying state or local agency.

Bhutta · filed 2025-12-18(e)(1)

His EEOC complaint therefore satisfied the 300-day requirement.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely EEOC charge; an initial inquiry that cannot reasonably be construed as a charge does not toll the filing deadline.

FOLGUERAS · filed 2025-12-22(e)(1)

Thus, to seek relief in the district court, Dr. Folgueras must have first filed an administrative complaint with the EEOC within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. ... The Initial Inquiry in this case therefore cannot be reasonably construed as a charge and is insufficient to toll the statute of limitations.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge within 300 days of the conduct complained of.

Hudson · filed 2025-12-27(e)(1)

That aside, although Title VII does permit a claim against a former employer for post-employment retaliation, see, e.g., Ruedlinger v. Jarrett, 106 F.3d 212, 217 (7th Cir. 1997), Ms. Hudson does not appear to have filed an EEOC charge regarding this alleged retaliation by New Prime—and it is too late for her to do so now, as an EEOC charge must be filed within 300 days of the conduct complained of. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). In short, any retaliation claim against New Prime is subject to dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an ADA claimant in a deferral state to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of each discrete alleged discriminatory act.

TAYLOR · filed 2025-12-29(e)(1)

Thus, the 300-day limitation bars claims brought before October 21, 2022.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) generally limits a Title VII claim to conduct within 300 days before the EEOC charge; earlier incidents may still provide background evidence.

Gibbs · filed 2026-01-05(e)(1)

The Court therefore only considers conduct within the statutory period for the purpose of Gibbs’s discrimination claims.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a timely discrimination charge before a Title VII suit; the court applied a 300-day filing deadline.

Williams v. Friendship Health · filed 2026-01-12(e)(1)

A charge must be filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and/or the Virginia Office of Civil Rights within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. ... In this case, the attached exhibits show that Williams filed an EEOC charge on June 30, 2024, more than seven years after her employment ended with Friendship.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an employee bringing a hostile work environment claim to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of an act contributing to that environment.

Larson · filed 2026-01-23(e)(1)

An employee wishing to bring a civil action for hostile work environment must file an administrative charge with the EEOC within 300 days of any single act contributing to the hostile work environment.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows a 300-day EEOC filing period only when there is some indication that the state agency received or was contacted about the charge.

Servicios Latinos, Inc. v. Luis G. Amado Gomez · filed 2026-01-27(e)(1)

To trigger the 300-day lookback period and successfully exhaust the administrative remedy, there must be some indication that the State agency received or was contacted about the Charge in some way.

In a deferral state, a claimant has 300 days after an alleged unlawful employment practice to file an EEOC charge.

Black v. Government Employees Insurance Company · filed 2026-01-29(e)(1)

“This period is extended to 300 days in a deferral state, one in which ‘state law proscribes the alleged employment practice and the charge has initially been filed with a state deferral agency.’” ... Given this, the Plaintiff may only rely upon alleged adverse acts that occurred on or after May 1, 2020, to support her Title VII and MFEPA discrimination and retaliation claims in this case.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a discrimination charge to be filed with the EEOC within 300 days when a state or local agency can grant or seek relief.

Beasley · filed 2026-01-29(e)(1)

Although Plaintiff filed his lawsuit within the 90-day time period required by statute, he failed to file his Charge with the EEOC within the 300-day time period required under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). His Charge was filed 21 days after the required 300-day time period.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge in a state with its own fair employment practices agency; at the pleading stage, a termination decision plausibly subject to revision based on future performance does not start that period.

Gross · filed 2026-01-29(e)(1)

see 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (providing that in a state with its own fair employment practices agency, the EEOC’s administrative filing period is 300 days). ... Although a close call, the Court finds – at the pleading stage – Plaintiff has plausibly alleged that the termination decision was not final at the time of the January 2024 letter. ... Thus, the Court denies Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss on this basis.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) allows 300 days to file an EEOC charge for a discriminatory act in a deferral state.

Maas · filed 2026-02-02(e)(1)

Here, Joe filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) on November 23, 2021, which was squarely within 300 days of his termination from JTM on February 12, 2021. ... For this reason, Joe is entitled to summary judgment on JTM’s fourth affirmative defense because there is no genuine dispute that Joe filed his claim within the appropriate period.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the challenged employment practice.

Bovell · filed 2026-02-04(e)(1)

Here, it is apparent from the face of plaintiff’s complaint that his EEOC charge came after the 300-day window and is thus untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge to be filed within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Alberti v. District of Columbia · filed 2026-02-10(e)(1)

Here, Plaintiff filed her EEOC charge on December 21, 2023, see EEOC Charge at ECF p. 1, meaning that any adverse actions that occurred before February 24, 2023, are not actionable under Title VII.

In Maryland, a Title VII charge must be filed within 300 days of the unlawful employment practice.

Brown · filed 2026-02-19(e)(1)

In a state such as Maryland, which has a state or local agency with such authority that has agreed to have the EEOC process charges of discrimination that would otherwise fall within its jurisdiction, the charge of discrimination must be submitted within 300 days of the act constituting the unlawful employment practice.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a New York plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of an alleged discriminatory act.

Schwetz v. Bd. of Coop. Educ. Servs. of Nassau Cnty. · filed 2026-02-20(e)(1)

Title VII requires a New York plaintiff such as Schwetz to file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days of an alleged discriminatory act. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) gives a plaintiff 300 days to file an EEOC charge in a deferral state, and each discrete denial of an accommodation request has its own filing period.

Rodriguez · filed 2026-02-23(e)(1)

This period is extended to 300 days if the plaintiff initially instituted proceedings with a state or local agency with authority to grant or seek relief. ... Each discrete denial of a request for accommodation is a separately actionable event.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff in New York to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Jordan · filed 2026-02-24(e)(1)

In any event, to be timely, the plaintiff would have had to file his complaint 300 days from August 2022, which would have been in June 2023. He filed the EEOC complaint in 2024, well beyond 300 days. Accordingly, the plaintiff’s August 2022 claims, as well as his claims about conduct before August 2022, are untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an employee in Ohio to file an EEOC charge within 300 days after the challenged employment action is communicated to the employee.

Fisher · filed 2026-02-27(e)(1)

“Pursuant to the statutory language of Title VII, the applicable statute of limitations begins to run from the date of ‘the alleged unlawful employment practice[.]’” Amini v. Oberlin Coll., 259 F.3d 493, 498 (6th Cir. 2001) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(e)(1)). ... Ms. Fisher’s Title VII claims are based upon acts that occurred in September and October 2021, but Ms. Fisher did not file her EEOC charge until August 22, 2023—after the 300-day limitations period had expired. Therefore, Ms. Fisher’s Title VII claims are dismissed as time barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a discrimination charge to be filed with the EEOC within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

ALLEN · filed 2026-03-02(e)(1)

The charge of discrimination must be filed within 180 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Thus, Plaintiff did not timely file the charge of discrimination within the 180 days.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an EEOC charge to be filed within 180 days of each alleged discrete act of discrimination.

Kanev · filed 2026-03-12(e)(1)

Under Title VII and the ADA, a person must file her EEOC charge within 180 days of each alleged discrete act of discrimination. ... Therefore, regardless of whether her employment ceased in 2019 (when she began receiving disability benefits) or in August 2024 (as she alleged), her Title VII and ADA charges were filed well beyond the 180-day deadline.

An ADA discrimination charge must be filed with the EEOC within 180 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Williams v. Minnesota State Guardian ad Litem Board · filed 2026-03-16(e)(1)

The charge must be filed with the EEOC “within one hundred and eighty days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred[.]” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e- 5(e)(1) (2018).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a claimant to file an EEOC charge within at most 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Robinson · filed 2026-03-06(e)(1)

Under Title VII, a claimant must file a charge with the EEOC about the unlawful conduct within, at most, 300 days “after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurred.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge to be filed with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Torres · filed 2026-03-20(e)(1)

Title VII requires an aggrieved party to file a charge with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Accordingly, her claims cannot be based on acts which occurred before May 5, 2024.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice; earlier conduct cannot support a discrete discrimination claim.

Stith · filed 2026-03-23(e)(1)

Title VII requires a claimant to file an EEOC charge of discrimination within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Thus, all conduct before November 16, 2022, cannot form the basis of any discrete claim of discrimination.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice.

Rooney · filed 2026-03-26(e)(1)

Specifically, a plaintiff must first file a charge with the EEOC within 300 days of the “alleged unlawful employment practice.” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1).

A Title VII claimant must file an EEOC charge within 300 days of an alleged unlawful employment action to preserve a private claim based on that action.

Muhammad · filed 2026-03-27(e)(1)

Both of those adverse actions occurred within 300 days of his EEOC charge’s filing, so his claims are not time-barred.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge within 300 days after the employee is informed of the allegedly discriminatory decision.

Parham · filed 2026-03-29(e)(1)

Under both Title VII and CADA, a plaintiff must file a charge or complaint of discrimination within 300 days after the alleged unlawful employment practice occurs. ... Under the authorities above, that notice triggered the 300-day period to file a Charge of Discrimination.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires an ADA plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 300 days of the challenged employment action before suing, subject to equitable tolling.

Biermann · filed 2026-04-13(e)(1)

The ADA requires that, before filing suit, a plaintiff exhaust administrative remedies by filing an EEOC charge within 300 days of the alleged unlawful employment action. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1). ... Defendant informed Plaintiff of his termination on June 7, 2024, so Plaintiff had until April 3, 2025 to timely file his EEOC charge. Plaintiff filed his charge on April 25, 2025, so it was untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)’s charge deadline may be met at the pleading stage when alleged harassment continued into the timely filing period.

Conaler · filed 2026-04-16(e)

Because a “complaint is to be liberally construed in favor of the plaintiff” when ruling on a Defendant’s motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), the Court finds that the allegation that Conaler was sexually harassed by Lacy from “late 2022 through 2023” is to be accepted as true and construed in Plaintiff’s favor that her charge with the EEOC was timely filed.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant to file a timely EEOC charge; the deadline is 300 days when the claimant initially brings the matter before an authorized state agency.

Farazi v. Oracle America, Inc. · filed 2026-04-23(e)(1)

The district court properly dismissed for failure to timely exhaust Farazi’s claims under Title VII because Farazi failed to allege facts sufficient to show that she timely filed a charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”). See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (providing that a charge of discrimination must be filed with the EEOC within 300 days of the allegedly unlawful practice where the person aggrieved has initially instituted proceedings with a State agency with authority to grant or seek relief from such practice); Scott v. Gino Morena Enters., LLC, 888 F.3d 1101, 1106 (9th Cir. 2018) (describing exhaustion requirements for Title VII claims).

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Gay · filed 2026-04-24(e)(1)

Under Title VII, a plaintiff must file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) bars reliance on discrete discriminatory or retaliatory acts that occurred before the charge-filing cutoff.

Cox · filed 2026-05-28(e)(1)

Therefore, regarding his claims for disparate treatment and retaliation, Plaintiff cannot rely on any discriminatory or retaliatory incidents that occurred prior to May 4, 2023.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII claimant in Puerto Rico to file an EEOC charge within 300 days; earlier acts may support a hostile work environment claim if a related act occurred within that period.

Rivero-Crespo · filed 2026-05-29(e)(1)

Thus, the Court may only consider events prior to May 9, 2024, the 300-day limitations cutoff, “so long as a related act fell within the limitations period.” Tobin v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 553 F.3d 121, 130 (1st Cir. 2009).

Section 2000e-5(e) requires a Title VII discrimination charge to be filed within 180 days; for non-selection, the period begins when the employee learns of the decision.

Robert L. Riley, Jr. v. Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation · filed 2026-06-05(e)

But as Defendants correctly argue, the statute of limitations on the EEOC charge began to run on the date Riley knew he would not be selected for the position.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII plaintiff to file an EEOC charge within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act; the government shutdown did not extend that deadline.

Brenyah v. Columbia Hospital · filed 2026-06-23(e)(1)

Under Title VII and the ADA, a plaintiff must file a charge of discrimination within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory act. ... It did not extend the deadline to file a charge of discrimination. So Brenyah’s second charge was untimely.

Section 2000e-5(e)(1) requires a Title VII charge in a deferral state to be filed within 300 days of the alleged discriminatory act.

Safford v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. · filed 2026-06-24(e)(1)

Therefore, any causes of action arising from events before February 1, 2022, for the FCRA, and April 7, 2022, for Title VII, the ADEA, and the ADA, are time-barred. See id.; 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1); Riccard, 307 F.3d at 1291; Joe’s Stone Crabs, 296 F.3d at 1271.

Section 2000e-5(f)(1) requires a right-to-sue letter from the Attorney General when a Title VII respondent is a governmental entity.

Jean-Francois · filed 2025-12-30(f)(1)

The Court agrees with Plaintiff and based on binding caselaw from the Eleventh Circuit, “[u]nder the provisions of 42 U.S.C.A. § 2000e-5(f)(1), a right-to-sue letter must be issued by the United States Attorney General because this case involves ‘a government, governmental agency, or political subdivision.’” Fouche, 713 F.2d at 1524.

Section 2000e-5(f)(1) gives the Attorney General exclusive authority to issue right-to-sue notices in cases against state and local governmental employers when the EEOC has not made a reasonable cause determination.

Proposed Change in EEOC Regulations Concerning Right-to-Sue Notices for Public Sector Employees · filed 1999-10-07(f)(1)

We believe that the better reading of section 706(f)(1) gives the Attorney General the exclusive authority to issue right-to-sue letters under such circumstances in cases involving state and local governmental employers.

Section 2000e-5(f)(1)’s 180-day waiting period does not apply when the EEOC dismisses a charge and issues a right-to-sue notice.

Perez-Tavarez · filed 2026-02-05(f)(1)

The 180-day period is inapplicable when the EEOC dismisses the charge, as it did in the instant case.

Section 2000e-5(f)(1) permits the EEOC to issue a right-to-sue notice when it dismisses a charge, even before 180 days have passed.

Leckrone · filed 2026-02-18(f)(1)

Title VII permits the EEOC to issue a notice of right to sue if the charge “is dismissed by the Commission” regardless of whether 180 days have passed.

Section 2000e-5(c) and (d) give state and local deferral agencies an initial opportunity to handle discrimination charges and leave them substantially independent of the EEOC.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Navy Federal Credit Union · filed 2005-09-13(c)-(d)

Based on our analysis of the pertinent statutory provisions, however, the two agencies operate with substantial independence.

Section 2000e-5(g)(2)(B) limits remedies for certain Title VII violations; its incorporation into the ADA does not create mixed-motive liability under the ADA.

Natofsky v. City Of New York · filed 2019-04-18(g)(2)(B)

This cross-cross-reference, however, cannot be used to create new substantive liability under the ADA as section 2000e-5(g)(2)(B) deals exclusively with the remedies available to plaintiffs who have first proven a violation under § 2000e-2(m), i.e. , a violation based on individual's "race, color, religion, sex, or national origin." 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(m).

Section 2000e-5(g)(2)(A) permits courts to remedy federal employers’ violations of Title VII’s anti-retaliation protections.

Terrance Reeves v. Hegseth · filed 2026-03-11(g)(2)(A)

Although Section 2000e-3(a) does not, by its own terms, apply to federal employers like the defendants, a federal-sector provision of Title VII permits courts to remedy “violation[s] of section 2000e-3(a).” 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g)(2)(A).