29 C.F.R. § 1614.409
Effect of filing a civil action
Filing a civil action under § 1614.407 or § 1614.408 shall terminate Commission processing of the appeal. A Commission decision on an appeal issued after a complainant files suit in district court will not be enforceable by the Commission. If private suit is filed subsequent to the filing of an appeal and prior to a final Commission decision, the complainant should notify the Commission in writing.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28
cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1996–2025 · leading case: Kathy J. Smith v. John E. Potter, Postmaster Gen. of the United States, 445 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir. 2006).
Kathy J. Smith v. John E. Potter, Postmaster Gen. of the United States, 445 F.3d 1000 (7th Cir. 2006). “Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 , once Smith filed her complaint in federal court the EEOC, by operation of law, lost any authority to proceed with her appeal.”
James R. Bankston v. Thomas E. White, Sec'y of the Army United States of Am., 345 F.3d 768 (9th Cir. 2003). “1994), Judge Posner distinguished McGinty (the Seventh Circuit case which had imposed the exhaustion requirement) by relying on a change in EEOC regulations, which had been amended to provide that EEOC proceedings would be dismissed if the complainant filed a lawsuit (now…”
Walch v. Adjutant Gen.'s Dep't, 533 F.3d 289 (5th Cir. 2008). “29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . The National Guard Bureau's regulation governing civilian discrimination complaint processing reflects this mandate: "When a civil action is filed before NGB has issued a final decision on the complaint, NGB will dismiss the complaint, providing that 180…”
Mary Bullock v. Jacqueline Berrien, 688 F.3d 613 (9th Cir. 2012). “It wrote: The regulation found at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 provides that a civil action “shall terminate Commission processing of the appeal.”
Anica Ashbourne v. Donna Hansberry, 894 F.3d 298 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . Ashbourne did not notify the district court of that dismissal or seek to add the Title VII claims to her pending case.”
Murchison v. Astrue, 689 F. Supp. 2d 781 (D. Maryland 2010). “See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . (Pl.’s Mem., Ex. 3 at 7-8 (bold in original).”
Williams v. Dep't of Vets. Affairs, 244 F. App'x 345 (Fed. Cir. 2007). “Under 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 , filing the district court action terminated her EEOC appeal.”
Taylor v. United States, 80 Fed. Cl. 376 (Fed. Cl. 2008). “See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . *378 COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0900) This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative processing of your complaint.”
Menoken v. Lerner, 270 F. Supp. 3d 200 (D.D.C. 2017). “EEOC dismissed these noncompliance appeals, along with Menoken’s 2003 request for reconsideration, pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 , which states that the filing of a civil action terminates EEOC’s processing of an appeal.”
Mathis v. Corp. for Nat'l & Cmty. Serv., 327 F. Supp. 2d 154 (D. Conn. 2004). “This holding does not encourage dilatory conduct or waste of administrative resources.”
Glenda J. Lawrence v. G-UM-BK Contractors, 262 F. App'x 149 (11th Cir. 2008). “On 23 June 2006, Lawrence filed the present action in state court and informed the EEOC that because of her civil action, her appeal pending with respect to the TVA should be terminated pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . On 23 July 2006, the EEOC issued a decision dismissing her…”
Santiago v. United States Dep't of Army, 128 F. Supp. 3d 469 (D.P.R. 2015). “; see 29 C.F.R. § 1614.409 . The reassignment claim, the subject of Santiago’s second administrative filing, was dismissed because he filed his judicial complaint six days after filing his formal complaint with the Army EEO office and before the Army had an opportunity to…”
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.