Jamela McQueen v. The Harnish Group, LLC

McQueen · United States District Court for the District of South Carolina · May 27, 2026 · No. 4:25-cv-11858-JD

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of South Carolina adopts a magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and grants the defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. The court holds that the plaintiff’s Title VII claims were filed two days after the applicable 90-day period following electronic receipt of the EEOC’s notice of rights. The court rejects equitable tolling and dismisses the claims with prejudice.

Court
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Writing for the Court
Joseph Dawson III
Jurisdiction
United States District Court for the District of South Carolina
Decision date
May 27, 2026
Docket number
4:25-cv-11858-JD
Procedural posture
Plaintiff brought Title VII claims in state court. Defendant removed the action to federal court and moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). After the magistrate judge recommended dismissal and plaintiff filed objections, the district court conducted review, overruled the objections, adopted the Report and Recommendation, and dismissed the complaint with prejudice.
Standard of review
The district court conducted de novo review of the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objections were made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The complaint was evaluated under Rule 12(b)(6), and the court could consider EEOC documents referenced in or integral to the complaint without converting the motion into one for summary judgment.
Precedential value
nonprecedential
Parties
Jamela McQueen v. The Harnish Group, LLC
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

title viisexual harassmenthostile work environmentretaliationmotions to dismiss

Practice areas

employment lawcivil rightscivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether McQueen's Title VII claims were barred because she filed suit two days after the ninety-day period following receipt of the EEOC's determination and notice of rights.
  2. Whether equitable tolling excused McQueen's untimely filing based on her asserted reliance on counsel, diligence, pro se status, and minimal delay.
  3. Whether the district court properly adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation and dismissed the complaint under Rule 12(b)(6).

Holdings

  1. McQueen's Title VII action was untimely because she filed suit on July 23, 2025, after the ninety-day filing period expired on July 21, 2025.
  2. Equitable tolling did not apply because McQueen offered only generalized assertions of diligence, reliance on counsel, pro se status, active pursuit of her claims, and minimal delay, without particularized facts showing wrongful conduct or extraordinary circumstances that made timely filing impossible.
  3. Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) was proper because the undisputed dates established that McQueen's Title VII claims were untimely, and the EEOC determination and notice of rights could be considered as documents referenced in or integral to the complaint.

Key quotations

Equitable tolling is available only in limited circumstances. (at 5)
Plaintiff’s assertions of diligence and minimal delay, without more particularized facts, do not warrant equitable tolling. (at 5)

Factual background

McQueen filed an EEOC charge alleging employment discrimination and received an emailed determination and notice of rights on April 21, 2025. The notice informed her that she had ninety days from receipt to file suit. She filed her complaint on July 23, 2025, while the court calculated the deadline as July 21, 2025. She alleged hostile work environment, sexual harassment, and retaliation under Title VII, and argued that equitable tolling should excuse the two-day delay.

Procedural history

McQueen filed an administrative charge with the EEOC on October 14, 2024. The EEOC emailed her a determination and notice of rights on April 21, 2025. She filed suit in the Horry County Court of Common Pleas on July 23, 2025, two days after the Title VII ninety-day filing period expired. The Harnish Group removed the case on September 2, 2025, moved to dismiss, and obtained a magistrate judge's recommendation that the action be dismissed as untimely. The district court adopted that recommendation after reviewing McQueen's objections.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…