Background
Rebecca Fraser filed an EEOC charge alleging sex discrimination, harassment, and retaliation by the University of Texas Medical Branch. The EEOC issued a Determination and Notice of Rights on December 1, 2022, and sent it to Fraser and her attorney by email and mail. Fraser filed suit on March 8, 2023.
The district court dismissed Fraser’s Title VII claims under Rule 12(b)(6), concluding that her suit was filed outside Title VII’s 90-day limitations period. It applied the presumption that Fraser’s attorney received the mailed notice three days after it was sent. The court also denied Fraser further leave to amend because she had not cured the timeliness deficiency despite a prior opportunity to do so.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit affirmed. Because the actual date on which Fraser’s attorney received the mailed notice was unknown, the court applied its three-day presumption and treated counsel as having received it on December 4, 2022. Receipt by either Fraser or her attorney started the 90-day period. Fraser’s March 8 filing came 94 days after presumed receipt and was therefore untimely.
The court did not decide whether the EEOC’s email notices independently started the limitations period. It also held that Fraser forfeited her equitable-tolling argument by failing to raise it in the district court.
Finally, the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying another amendment. Fraser had previously received leave to address identified deficiencies but did not cure the timeliness problem, making a further amendment unproductive.
Key Takeaways
- A Title VII plaintiff must sue within 90 days after either the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney receives the EEOC right-to-sue notice.
- When the actual receipt date of a mailed notice is unknown, the Fifth Circuit presumes receipt three days after mailing.
- Equitable tolling generally cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, and leave to amend may be denied when earlier amendments failed to cure the same deficiency.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the strict enforcement of Title VII’s 90-day filing deadline and the consequences of failing to document when counsel received an EEOC notice. Attorneys cannot rely on the date they later download or review the notice when presumed receipt by mail occurred earlier.
It also highlights two procedural risks: equitable tolling must be presented to the district court, and a plaintiff seeking another amendment should identify concrete facts that would cure the defect.