Court Limits EEOC’s Authority on Early Right-to-Sue Letters

In Cecilia Prichard v. Long Island University, Judge Eric Komitee of the Eastern District of New York dismissed a disability discrimination suit after finding the plaintiff’s right-to-sue (RTS) letter was issued prematurely.

Duane Morris’s class action blog calls the decision an example of how the Supreme Court’s elimination of Chevron deference in Loper Bright is reshaping employment discrimination litigation.

The ruling is certainly a significant marker in how courts may now approach the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) regulatory authority when statutory language is in dispute.

The dispute arose after Long Island University terminated financial aid to counselor Cecilia Prichard in 2022, following her exhaustion of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) time off after a kidney transplant.

Prichard filed an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) charge with the EEOC in July 2023 and, at her request, received an RTS letter only 57 days later.

The EEOC relied on a regulation allowing “early” RTS letters where the agency expects it cannot complete an investigation within 180 days. LIU moved to dismiss, arguing that the early letter violated the statutory waiting period under Title VII.

Judge Komitee agreed with LIU, holding that the EEOC lacked authority to bypass the 180-day waiting period.

He noted that prior circuit-level support for early RTS letters had depended on Chevron deference, which no longer applies after Loper Bright. Without deference, he concluded the statute’s text provides no basis for the EEOC’s regulation.

The court directed the agency to reopen Prichard’s charge and allowed her to refile once the statutory period had been satisfied.

The case shows how the removal of Chevron deference invites new challenges to EEOC regulations. While this ruling only delayed the plaintiff’s claim, it foreshadows broader scrutiny of EEOC practices.

Employers should assess strategically whether to contest early right-to-sue letters, balancing the benefits of delaying litigation against the risks of protracted EEOC investigations.