Jody Schultz v. Goldbelt Glacier Health, 713 F. App'x 121

Plaintiff Jody Schultz, age 63, worked as Director of Psychological Health at an Air National Guard unit through a contractor; Goldbelt replaced her contractor and her contract employment ended January 31, 2015.
Air Force posted two USAJOBS Social Worker announcements: Apr–Sep 2014 and Oct 2014–Mar 2015; both required an MSW and a clinical social work license; Schultz had neither.
Schultz applied to the first announcement (Sept 28, 2014) but did not apply to the second (from which the Air Force hired Matthew Dalrymple, a younger applicant with MSW and license); she sent informal letters/emails expressing interest instead.
Schultz initiated EEO counseling in Feb 2015; her attorney preferred written interrogatories, but initial counseling never occurred and no case number was assigned; Schultz filed suit on June 29, 2015 (less than 180 days after her administrative contact).
District Court granted summary judgment for the Air Force, holding Schultz failed to exhaust administrative remedies and failed to establish a prima facie ADEA failure-to-hire claim; the Third Circuit affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Exhaustion of administrative remedies under the ADEA	Schultz argues she initiated EEO process and agency failed to conduct required counseling (should have accepted written interrogatories), so she was excused from waiting	Air Force argues Schultz abandoned the administrative process by filing suit before agency action and regulations require an in-person initial counseling session; she filed suit too early	Affirmed: Schultz failed to exhaust; written interrogatories not required; no equitable estoppel (no due diligence)
Whether Schultz made a prima facie failure-to-hire ADEA claim	Schultz contends she applied/communicated adequate interest and was qualified based on prior performance	Air Force stresses Schultz did not apply to the specific announcement that produced the hire and lacked the advertised MSW and clinical license; hires Schultz cited were for different positions	Affirmed: No prima facie case — she didn’t apply to the relevant vacancy and lacked required qualifications

Stevens v. Dep't of Treasury, 500 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1991) (ADEA claimants may follow administrative process or give 30-day notice before filing suit)
Purtill v. Harris, 658 F.2d 134 (3d Cir. 1981) (plaintiff who invokes administrative process must complete it before suing)
Robinson v. Dalton, 107 F.3d 1018 (3d Cir. 1997) (equitable estoppel in exhaustion context requires extraordinary circumstances and plaintiff diligence)
EEOC v. Metal Service Co., 892 F.2d 341 (3d Cir. 1990) (plaintiff may establish hiring prima facie case without formal application if reasonable attempt to convey interest)
Newark Branch, NAACP v. Town of Harrison, 907 F.2d 1408 (3d Cir. 1990) (futility or deterrence may excuse formal application requirement)
Fowle v. C & C Cola, 868 F.2d 59 (3d Cir. 1989) (elements of prima facie case for failure to hire under ADEA)
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (U.S. 1973) (framework for burden-shifting in disparate treatment cases)