Garabed O. Mirzoian v. Michel N. El-Rahi; Nidal Z. Zayed

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
GARABED O. MIRZOIAN,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
MICHEL N. EL-RAHI; NIDAL Z. ZAYED,
Defendants-Appellees.
No. 18-15367
D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00024
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of the Northern Mariana Islands
Ramona V. Manglona, Chief Judge, Presiding
Submitted July 10, 2018**
Before: CANBY, W. FLETCHER, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.
Garabed O. Mirzoian appeals pro se from the district court’s order
dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction Mirzoian’s employment action
alleging wrongful termination in violation of Title VII, the Americans with
Disabilities Act (“ADA”), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
FILED
JUL 13 2018
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2 18-15367
(“GINA”), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”). We have
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of
subject matter jurisdiction. Sommatino v. United States, 255 F.3d 704, 708 (9th
Cir. 2001). We vacate and remand.
The district court dismissed Mirzoian’s action for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction because it concluded that Mirzoian failed to exhaust administrative
remedies. However, although Mirzoian did not file a discrimination charge with
the EEOC until 2015, he filed a discrimination complaint with the Commonwealth
of the Northern Mariana Islands (“CNMI”) Department of Labor within 18 days of
his termination in 2006. See 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (a charge must be made
with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged unlawful employment practice or
within 300 days if a charge is first made with an authorized state agency); see also
Laquaglia v. Rio Hotel & Casino, Inc., 186 F.3d 1172, 1174-1175 (9th Cir. 1999)
(explaining that under worksharing agreements between EEOC and some state
agencies, when a charge is filed with the state agency before the 300-day filing
deadline expires, it is deemed automatically filed with the EEOC on that same
day). It is not clear from the district court’s order whether the district court
considered the effect of Mirzoian’s filing of the complaint with the CNMI
Department of Labor on the issue of exhaustion of administrative remedies.
We therefore vacate the dismissal order and remand for the district court to

-- 2 of 3 --

3 18-15367
consider whether Mirzoian could be deemed to have constructively filed his claims
with the EEOC on the day he filed his charge with the CNMI Department of
Labor, and therefore exhausted his administrative remedies at that time.
VACATED and REMANDED.

-- 3 of 3 --