Ruiz v. Vilsack
2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12541
| D.D.C. | 2011Background
- Plaintiff Ruiz, proceeding pro se, sues USDA Secretary under Title VII for Hispanic-origin discrimination at IITF in San Juan, Puerto Rico (May 2002–Aug 2005).
- Lynch, a Caucasian supervisor, allegedly interfered with work and replaced Ruiz as IITF website manager; Ruiz then had minimal duties and risked job during reorganization.
- Ruiz complained internally in Nov 2003; filed USDA OCR complaint June 3, 2005 claiming Hispanic discrimination; later reassigned and a counseling memo was left Aug 17, 2005.
- USDA consolidated and investigated discrimination claims; final decision denied relief; Ruiz appealed to EEOC in Oct 2008; EEOC affirmed; reconsideration denied June 19, 2009.
- Ruiz received EEOC right-to-sue letter (presumed receipt five days after mailing) and filed suit in 2010 after a rejected IFP application; the court denied IFP and dismissed for untimely filing.
- Court held the 90-day limitations period under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) was not met, and dismissed the complaint.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness of filing under 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1) | Ruiz filed within 90 days via IFP | Complaint untimely under 90-day clock | Untimely; must be dismissed |
| Effect of IFP denial on the 90-day period | IFP filing tolled the period | Tolled only during IFP review, not after denial | Untimely even with tolling; dismissal warranted |
| Whether equitable tolling applies due to IFP process | Equitable tolling should apply given misunderstanding | No equitable tolling beyond IFP review; strict deadline | No relief; statute of limitations not tolled to cure filing date |
| Venue adequacy | Not dispositive; decision on timeliness rendered moot venue issue | ||
| Exhaustion and administrative remedies | Exhaustion completed | Not all claims exhausted | Court found issues covered by EEOC decision; focus on timeliness only |
Key Cases Cited
- Baldwin Cnty. Welcome Ctr. v. Brown, 466 U.S. 147 (1984) (presumed receipt date for EEOC right-to-sue letter typically three to five days)
- Smith-Haynie v. Dist. of Columbia, 155 F.3d 575 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (90-day filing period is a statute of limitations, not jurisdictional)
- Williams-Guice v. Bd. of Educ. of Chi., 45 F.3d 161 (7th Cir. 1995) (tolls during review of IFP petition; then clock resumes upon denial)
- Jarrett v. U.S. Sprint Comm'cns Co., 22 F.3d 256 (10th Cir. 1994) (IFP filings denied do not relate back to lodging for SOL purposes)
- Truitt v. Cnty. of Wayne, 148 F.3d 644 (6th Cir. 1998) (IFP timing tolls SOL while petition pending)