29 C.F.R. § 1601.25
Failure of conciliation; notice
Where the Commission is unable to obtain voluntary compliance as provided by title VII, the ADA, GINA, or the PWFA and it determines that further efforts to do so would be futile or nonproductive, it shall, through the appropriate District Director, the Director of the Office of Field Programs, or Director of Field Management Programs, or their designees, so notify the respondent in writing.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 53
cases, 1969–2012 · leading case: Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., Defendant-appellee, 505 F.2d 610 (5th Cir. 1975).
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., Defendant-appellee, 505 F.2d 610 (5th Cir. 1975). “2000e-5(f)(1) (1974), 29 C.F.R. 1601.25 (1972). On July 16, 1973, the Commission brought this action in the district court, which held that Section 706(f)(1) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.”
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. North Hills Passavant Hosp., 544 F.2d 664 (3rd Cir. 1976). “On September 20, 1974, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (1974), the EEOC informed North Hills’ attorney that conciliation had failed.”
Minor v. Northville Pub. Schs., 605 F. Supp. 1185 (E.D. Mich. 1985). “Despite the provision in the statute relating to the responsibility of the Attorney General in actions against a government employer, the pertinent regulations enacted in response to the amendments, 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (1972) provided: In any instance in which the Commission is…”
Camack v. Hardee's Food Sys., Inc., 410 F. Supp. 469 (M.D.N.C. 1976). “See 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 . On December 6, 1974, plaintiff appeared at the office of the Clerk of Court in Greensboro, North Carolina, with the EEOC papers and requested the appointment of an attorney.”
Melvin D. GARNER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. E. I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & Co., Defendant-Appellee, 538 F.2d 611 (4th Cir. 1976). “stly, the express words and the implications of the letter merely indicate that up to now the conciliation efforts have been unsuccessful, without going so far as to notify the aggrieved party that a "conciliation agreement" is, in the Commission's judgment, not going to be…”
Hochstadt v. Worcester Found. for Experimental Biology, Inc., 425 F. Supp. 318 (D. Mass. 1976). “1975); see also 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (1974). *321 (f)(2) Whenever a charge is filed with the Commission and the Commission concludes on the basis of a preliminary investigation that prompt judicial action is necessary to carry out the purposes of this Act, the Commission .”
Gloria ZAMBUTO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., a Foreign Corp., Defendant-Appellee, 544 F.2d 1333 (5th Cir. 1977). “29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (1974) requires that the notice also contain: (1) A copy of the charge.”
Melvin W. Coles v. Gen. Howard W. Penny, Dir., Def. Mapping Agency, 531 F.2d 609 (D.C. Cir. 1976). “Of interest to us is the provision codified as 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (a)(3) (1975), which requires that the notice to the aggrieved party re *613 quired by the Act must include “[ajdvice concerning his or her rights to proceed in court under Section 706(f)(1) of Title VII.”
Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, Plaintiff-appellant, v. Klingler Elec. Corp., Defendant-appellee, 636 F.2d 104 (5th Cir. 1981). “29 C.F.R. 1601.25 (1977). At Klingler’s request, negotiations were resumed.”
Samuel Culpepper, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross v. Reynolds Metals Co., Defendant-Appellee-Cross, 421 F.2d 888 (5th Cir. 1970). “2d 283 (1969), a charging party may request under Commission Regulation 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (a) a notice of the right to sue at any time after 60 days has elapsed from the filing of a charge with the Commission.”
Victoria MISSIRLIAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUNTINGTON Mem'l Hosp., Defendant-Appellee, 662 F.2d 546 (9th Cir. 1981). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (a)(3) (1975). This advice was generally provided in the form of a “Notice of Right to Sue.”
Leo Rosen, Util. Co-Workers Ass'n & Morgan Sweeney v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co., 409 F.2d 775 (3rd Cir. 1969). “3), the Commission notified appellants, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (b), that they had thirty days in which to institute suit.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25(a) — 1 case
— 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25(a)(3) — 1 case
Victoria MISSIRLIAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HUNTINGTON Mem'l Hosp., Defendant-Appellee, 662 F.2d 546 (9th Cir. 1981). “” 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (a)(3) (1975). This advice was generally provided in the form of a “Notice of Right to Sue.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25(b) — 1 case
Leo Rosen, Util. Co-Workers Ass'n & Morgan Sweeney v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co., 409 F.2d 775 (3rd Cir. 1969). “3), the Commission notified appellants, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25 (b), that they had thirty days in which to institute suit.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1601.25(c) — 1 case
King v. Illinois Bell Tel. Co., 476 F. Supp. 495 (N.D. Ill. 1978).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.