United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
JOHNSON COLEMAN United States District Judge.
Ronald Winesberry submitted -a pro se Complaint,
alleging employment discrimination on the basis of race and
color in violation of Title VII. Defendant OSI Industries
moves to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
12(b)(6), arguing that Complaint is untimely . For the
reasons stated herein, the Court grants the motion.
Ronald Winesbeny submitted a pro se complaint to the
Clerk's Office of the U.S. District Court on January 28,
2016. The Complaint was stamped "received" and
docketed. The original complaint was not accompanied by
payment of the filing fees or a petition for leave to proceed
in forma pauperis. This Court set the case for
status on March 7, 2016, when Winesberry failed to appear the
Court dismissed the Complaint for want of prosecution. On
March 16, 2016, this Court granted Winesberry's motion to
reinstate. That same day, Winesberry filed an in forma
pauperis petition and motion to appoint counsel. The
Court granted Winesberry's request to proceed in
forma pauperis on April 14, 2016, and denied without
prejudice Winesberry's motion for counsel. Defendant OSI
Industries moved to dismiss the Complaint on July 6, 2016.
The Court entered a briefing schedule and thereafter
recruited counsel to represent Winesberry.
survive a motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 12(b)(6), a complaint must contain sufficient
factual allegations to state a claim for relief that is
plausible on its face. Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S.
62, 678 (2009). The plaintiff does not need to provide
detailed factual allegations, but must provide enough factual
support to raise her right to relief above a speculative
level. BellAtl. Corp. v. Twomblj, 550 U.S. 544, 555
(2007). When reviewing a motion to dismiss, the court must
accept all well-pleaded factual allegations as true and draw
all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs favor.
Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94 (2007);
Pisciota v. Old Nat. Bancorp, AA9 F.3d 629, 633 (7th
Industries argues that the Complaint is time-barred because
it was not "filed" within 90 days of Winesberry
receiving a notice of right to sue from the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). A lawsuit claiming
violation of Title VII must be filed within 90 days of the
plaintiff receiving notice from the EEOC. 42 U.S.C. §
2000e-5(f)(1). Winesberry received his notice of right to sue
from the EEOC on November 15, 2015. OSI Industries contends
that the Complaint is untimely because it was not technically
deemed "filed" until this Court granted
Winesberry's in forma pauperis petition on April
14, 2016. Thus, the question before the Court is when is a
Complaint "filed" for purposes of the statute of
limitations in a Title VII claim.
Rule of Civil Procedure 3 states that "[a] civil action
is commenced by filing a complaint with the court." Rule
5(d)(2) provides that "[a] paper is filed by delivering
it: (A) to the clerk." Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(d)(2)(A).
"The clerk must not refuse to file a paper solely
because it is not in the form prescribed by these rules or by
a local rule or practice." Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(d)(4). The
Local Rules of the Northern District of Illinois provide
further guidance on how and when a Complaint is deemed to
have been filed when a plaintiff is seeking in forma
pauperis status. Local Rule 3.3(b) provides:
Any document submitted for filing for which a filing fee is
required must be accompanied either by the
appropriate fee or an IFP petition. Notwithstanding this
provision, the clerk will file any document including a
complaint in a civil action... without prepayment, but such
filings shall be subject to the sanctions set forth in
section (e) of this Rule.
N.D. Ill. L.R. 3.3(b) (emphasis added).
Upon denial of an IFP petition, the clerk shall
notify the person filing the documents of the amount of fees
due. If the required fees are not paid within 15 days of the
date of such notification, or within such other time as may
be fixed by the court, the clerk shall notify the judge
before whom the matter is pending of the nonpayment. The