Kuriakose T. Joseph v. COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION On Appeal from…

NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT
_____________
No. 07-4259
_____________
KURIAKOSE T. JOSEPH,
Appellant
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT
OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
______________
On Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(D.C. No. 06-cv-4916)
District Judge: Honorable Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr.
_______________
Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)
February 6, 2009
Before: McKEE, JORDAN, and LOURIE*, Circuit Judges.
(Filed: February 6, 2009)
_______________
OPINION
_______________
_______________
*Honorable Alan D. Lourie, Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation.

-- 1 of 3 --

The District Court dismissed other claims advanced by Joseph, but Joseph has1
only appealed the dismissal of his Title VII claim.
2
PER CURIAM
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed
plaintiff Kuriakose T. Joseph’s Title VII discrimination claim pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) because he failed to timely exhaust his administrative remedies.
In order to preserve his claim under Title VII, Joseph was required to file a charge with
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) within 300 days of the last
challenged act by his employer, Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection.
Joseph submitted an intake questionnaire to the EEOC within the 300 day period but did
not file his EEOC charge until the statutory period had expired. After the District Court
dismissed his case and denied his motion for reconsideration, Joseph filed this appeal.1
Following the dismissal, the Supreme Court decided Federal Express Corp. v.
Holowecki, 128 S.Ct. 1147 (Feb. 27, 2008), in which it concluded that, in some instances,
an intake questionnaire may constitute a charge under the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act.
On Appeal, Joseph claims that the intake questionnaire that he submitted to the
EEOC within the statutory period, and which is not a part of the District Court record,
constitutes a charge pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Holowecki. In light of
these developments, we will vacate the portion of the District Court’s order dismissing

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Joseph’s Title VII claim, as well as the order denying reconsideration of that dismissal,
and remand this action for the District Court to examine Joseph’s intake questionnaire
and determine in the first instance what impact, if any, Holowecki has on the Title VII
claim.

-- 3 of 3 --