Mary Bullock v. Jacqueline Berrien

Good Law
688 F.3d 613·2012 WL 3064862·26 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1046·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15670
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 30, 201210-55866California2,186 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Plaintiff Mary Bullock, a former employee of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”), appeals from the district court’s dismissal of her disability discrimination suit under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. The district court dismissed Bullock’s complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies.

Prior to filing suit, Bullock filed an administrative complaint that was adjudicated by an administrative law judge (“ALJ”). After the ALJ denied relief in part, Bullock filed an optional administrative appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“the Commission”). She subsequently withdrew her appeal without waiting 180 days as specified in 29 C.F.R. § 1614.407 (d), and filed suit in district court based on the same claims she asserted in her administrative complaint. The district court held under Rivera v. United States Postal Service, 830 F.2d 1037 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1009 , 108 S.Ct. 1737 , 100 L.Ed.2d 200 (1988), that it lacked jurisdiction because Bullock had not waited 180 days after filing her administrative appeal and therefore had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies.

In its initial…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.