No. 21-522
Michael Simko v. United States Steel Corporation
Tags: administrative-exhaustion administrative-procedure civil-action civil-rights eeoc eeoc-charge employment employment-discrimination retaliation retaliation-claim title-vii
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity EmploymentDiscrimina
SocialSecurity EmploymentDiscrimina
Latest Conference:
2022-01-07
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a claim of unlawful retaliation for filing an EEOC charge can be addressed in a civil action without a second formal administrative charge
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Whether, or under what circumstances, a claim that an employer unlawfully retaliated against an employee for filing a charge of discrimination with the EEOC under the remedial structure of Title VII may be addressed in an ensuing civil action, if the employee did not file a second formal administrative charge specifically alleging the retaliation.
Docket Entries
2022-01-10
Petition DENIED.
2021-12-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/7/2022.
2021-12-21
Reply of petitioner Michael Simko filed. (Distributed)
2021-12-08
Brief of respondent United States Steel Corp. in opposition filed.
2021-10-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including December 8, 2021.
2021-10-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 8, 2021 to December 8, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2021-10-06
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 8, 2021)
Attorneys
Michael Simko
John E. Egers Jr. — Julian Law Firm, Petitioner
John E. Egers Jr. — Julian Law Firm, Petitioner
United States Steel Corp.
Leon F. DeJulius Jr. — Jones Day, Respondent
Leon F. DeJulius Jr. — Jones Day, Respondent