On the Plaintiff's behalf, the American Postal Workers Union filed a grievance and appealed the grievance to arbitration in February 2006. The grievance was denied on July 16, 2007. Plaintiff then filed a request for EEO counseling on September 4, 2007 and an EEO complaint on November 13, 2007. After the Postal Service dismissed the EEO complaint, Plaintiff appealed to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC") which affirmed the Postal Service's decision. Plaintiff finally filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland on December 4, 2008 alleging that he was dismissed because of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, retaliation, and age. The United States District Court for the District of Maryland granted summary judgment to the Postal Service on both the Title VII claim and the ADEA claim because the Plaintiff failed to follow the administrative and procedural requirements for filing such claims.

Title VII claim:

.To assert a Title VII claim in a United States District Court, plaintiffs must first exhaust the EEOC administrative process. Under EEOC regulations, employees must contact an EEO counselor within 45 days of alleged discriminatory acts. Here, Plaintiff did not contact an EEO counselor until well more than 45 days after the alleged discriminatory act. The fact that the American Postal Workers Union filed a grievance on Plaintiff's behalf prior to his contacting an EEO counselor did not toll the 45 day time limit. In addition, the court found it persuasive that Plaintiff did not provide an explanation for his delay in contacting an EEO counselor. For these reasons, Plaintiff's Title VII claims failed as a matter of law.

ADEA claim:

Employees have two options for filing an age discrimination claim under the ADEA in a United States District Court. First, an employee may invoke the EEOC administrative process and then file a civil action in federal court if he is not satisfied with the administrative remedies. Alternatively, the employee can waive his administrative remedies and proceed immediately to federal court.

In the instant case, the first route for pursuing an ADEA claim was closed to Plaintiff because he had not properly invoked the EEOC administrative process by contacting an EEO counselor within 45 days of his dismissal. The second route for presenting a claim under the ADEA in federal court was also closed to Plaintiff because EEOC regulations require notice to the EEOC by plaintiffs intending to file a civil action within 180 days of the occurrence of the alleged unlawful practice. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.201(a). Since over one year and nine months had passed between the time of the alleged discriminatory act and when Plaintiff first requested EEO counseling, the EEOC could not have had notice of Plaintiff's intent to sue within the required 180 days. For these reasons, Plaintiff's age discrimination claim under the ADEA failed.