USCA1 Opinion
October 25, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
____________________
No. 94-1805
EDUARDA C. AMARAL,
Plaintiff, Appellant,
v.
RHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL TRUST, ET AL.,
Defendants, Appellees.
____________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
[Hon. Raymond J. Pettine, Senior U.S. District Judge]
__________________________
____________________
Before
Cyr, Circuit Judge,
_____________
Bownes, Senior Circuit Judge,
____________________
and Stahl, Circuit Judge.
_____________
____________________
Eduarda C. Amaral on brief pro se.
_________________
Joseph V. Cavanagh, Jr., Michael DiBiase, Karen A. Pelczarski and
_______________________ ________________ ___________________
Blish & Cavanagh on brief for appellees.
________________
____________________
____________________
Per Curiam. Appellant Eduarda C. Amaral appeals the
___________
entry of summary judgment by the United States District Court
for the District of Rhode Island in favor of appellees, Rhode
Island Trust National Bank and Christopher Brodeur. Amaral
claims to have suffered discrimination in violation of Title
VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. 2000e. The
court dismissed the action on the ground that Amaral had
failed to file a timely discrimination charge with the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission [EEOC]. We have reviewed
the record in this case, as well as the parties' briefs, and
we affirm essentially on the same grounds as those relied
upon by the district court.
In a "deferral state" like Rhode Island, see Paulo v.
___ _____
Cooley, Inc., 686 F. Supp. 377, 382 (D.R.I. 1988), a
____________
plaintiff alleging discrimination in violation of Title VII
must file an administrative complaint with the EEOC within
240 days of the challenged conduct. Mack v. Great Atlantic &
____ ________________
Pacific Tea Co., 871 F.2d 179, 181 (1st Cir. 1989). The
______________
evidence in the instant case is uncontested that Amaral filed
a sworn complaint with the EEOC, see 42 U.S.C. 2000e-5(b);
___
29 C.F.R. 1601.9 (charge of discrimination must be signed
and verified under oath), only on September 25, 1992, which
was 291 days after the most recent alleged discriminatory
conduct.
Moreover, Amaral has not presented sufficient evidence
to entitle her to equitable tolling of the limitations
-2-
period. See Mack, 871 F.2d at 185 (this court "hew[s] to a
___ ____
'narrow view' of equitable exceptions to Title VII
limitations periods").
Affirmed.
________
-3-
