MOTOROLA, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

Motorola appeals a district court’s order, 317 F.Supp. 282 , enforcing an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) discovery demand, denying Motorola’s motion to quash the demand, and permitting the EEOC to amend an unfair employment practice charge filed against Motorola. Because we hold that the proceedings before the district court were premature, we remand.

Acting pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(a), a member of the EEOC charged Motorola with various unfair employment practices. No proceedings were commenced before the Arizona Civil Rights Commission.

Under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(c), an EEOC commissioner may not commence an unfair employment practice charge without first filing notice of such charge before a state agency which is authorized “to grant or seek relief from such practice.” The Arizona Civil Rights Commission is such an agency. Crosslin v. Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., 422 F.2d 1028 (9th Cir. 1970), cert. granted, judgment vacated, and remanded for further consideration, 400 U.S. 1004 , 91 S.Ct. 562 , 27 L.Ed.2d 618 (1971). That commission’s jurisdiction is limited to complaints filed by “any person claiming to be aggrieved.” Arizona Revised…