WPC 6և#١#"$̿O5K-dT6և#jlcR?C#;{cˆ ?O"۴Sγ veRNj>?Y3CuK**LψLĬN,CCyLgc6M;Mt@'L^#rO!~[!,wWp_YGޛxb@}"ֳ,?<c]u z ~,kQ.T'fwX!sśVݦsvgH}t]EKdTմL/2=c}9^[`7`ȑVcKRxӐlDoQ`zigY"dž*&> :1T%+'-%H Dd>zFf_CrZ[Bc*\We):}ve!i]nPN3ʳ|2# %} 0D 0(UF 05nT Na 0c ^ w4 mEfaN> 7b===EQM76Dm9 BUFUFMU@KONICA MINOLTA 7085/IP-60200X(#$  0  ($.Courier New Regular(d:2p;$ !    =/5a/XXdd=    0    p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    1    _Jorge'shusband,thecouple'sconjugalpartnership,and  Jorge'swardarealsoplaintiffsandappellants.Becausetheir  claimsarepurelyderivative,wetreatJorgeasifshewerethe \ soleplaintiffandappellant.Ourdecisionis,ofcourse,binding 2 onallparties.<6X9`("Courier NewTTXXx6X@DQX@<6X9`(CourierTTXXw6X@QX@ & p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    5    _Jorge'srelianceonFlahertyv.MetromailCorp.,235F.3d  133,13839(2dCir.2000),inwhichanemployeewhohadallegeda  constructivedischargewasallowedtostartthelimitationsclock \ forherdiscriminationclaimfromthedatethatshesubmittedher 2 letterofresignation,missesthemark.Theretheplaintiffhad X remainedatworkafterbeingnotifiedofher"loomingtermination" . andcontinued,uptothedateofherresignation,tosuffer   indignitiesattributabletoadiscriminatorilyhostilework   environment.Seeid.at138.Inthiscase,thelastactof `  discriminationwasthetransferorderitself.Flahertyis, 6   therefore,inapposite.z}2s fq06Xy File3|xUTABLE Aq:\template\OPINIONS\SELYA.WPTH- -  G p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    6    _Afederalemployeemay,ofcourse,interveneinanaction  broughtbytheEEOConherbehalf.See42U.S.C.2000e5(f)(1).  p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    7    _Jorgemakesafeebleattempttorelyonthecontinuing  violationdoctrine.See,e.g.,Nat'lR.R.PassengerCorp.v.  Morgan,536U.S.101,11517(2002);Mackv.GreatAtl.&Pac.Tea \ Co.,871F.2d179,182(1stCir.1989).Thatdoctrinerelatesto 2 statutesoflimitationsandhasnobearingonrelieffromTitle X VII'sexhaustionrequirements. - p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    2    _Inthedistrictcourt,thegovernmentoriginallyfileda  hybridmotiontodismiss"pursuanttoRule12(b)(6)andRule56(c)  oftheFederalRulesofCivilProcedure."ItsreplytoJorge's \ oppositionconfirmedthisambivalence,requestingthat"thisentire 2 actionbedismissed,orinthealternative,that[thedistrict X court]grantsummaryjudgmenttodefendants."Inrulingonthe . motion,thedistrictcourttreateditasamotiontodismiss.See   Jorgev.Rumsfeld,Civ.No.031224,slipop.at1(D.P.R.Mar.9,   2004)(unpublished).Beforeus,thegovernmenthasbriefedthe `  caseintermsoftheRule12(b)(6)standard.Becausethatstandard 6   ismorefavorabletoJorgethantheRule56standard,seeCollier  \  v.CityofChicopee,158F.3d601,60203(1stCir.1998),we  2  followthedistrictcourt'sleadandapplythejurisprudenceof   Rule12(b)(6). : p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    3    _BecausetheformerdateispotentiallymorehelpfultoJorge,  weassumearguendothatitwasthedateofherretirement. / p;$  =/-1/XXdd=    4    _Inherappellatebriefs,Jorgeassertsforthefirsttime  thatAAFEShadbeenplanningtoclosetheToylandstoreandthat  hertransferwasthusmerelyanopeninggambitenroutetothe \ eventualeliminationofherjob.Wedeclinetoconsiderthis 2 previouslyunraisedandinherentlyspeculativeassertion. d.Courier New Regular<4 9Z+.Courier New Regular(9 Z(Times New Roman !  _TRY,3'X3' Letter 3' Letter3'T ? * !     0YX0X1j@0YUnitedStatesCourtofAppeals  #1XX1j@#1ɱX1XFortheFirstCircuit#1XX1ɱY##0X-1XX1X#   A') ` dE< ` A   No.041772 K  @<< MIRIAMJORGEETAL.,  G  @Plaintiffs,Appellants,   @tt)v. O  @ DONALDH._RUMSFELD_,SECRETARY,UNITEDSTATES K  @DEPARTMENTOFDEFENSE, ! @<< Defendant,Appellee. } A') ` dE<(` A )y @ APPEALFROMTHEUNITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT ^ @ FORTHEDISTRICTOFPUERTORICO   @[Hon.Jaime_Pieras_,Jr.,SeniorU.S.DistrictJudge] f A') ` dE<` A b @'Before G   @@((_Torruella_,_Selya_ԀandLynch,   CircuitJudges. O " A') ` dE<!` A !K$       MarieElsie_L;pez_Ԅ_Adames_,withwhom_Gonzlez_Ԅ_L;pez_Ԁ&_L;pez_Ԅ "0& _Adames_wasonbrief,forappellants. #'   FidelA._Sevillano_ԀDelRio,AssistantUnitedStatesAttorney, $( withwhomH.S.Garcia,UnitedStatesAttorney,andMiguelA. b% ) Fernandez,AssistantUnitedStatesAttorney,wereonbrief,for 8&!* appellee. '^"+ *'ddd Xdd Xdd X(#(#,( dd ,( dd ,( dd +  ( $-( $ ) SI)n$. @38462@SApril21,2005 )D%0  RHC*&1" @38462 @ R()n$2  (  * !   |-(4?   8-1XXdd8*,X` XX* ` _SELYA_,CircuitJudge. PlaintiffappellantMiriamJorge  broughtadiscriminationsuitagainsthergovernmentemployer. #  1      ׀ x ThedistrictcourtruledthatJorge'scauseofactionundertheAge $t DiscriminationinEmploymentAct(_ADEA_),29U.S.C.621634,was   timebarredandthatherclaimunderTitleVIIoftheCivilRights |  Actof1964(TitleVII),42U.S.C.2000e2(a)(1),wasforeclosed ( x  becauseshehadnotexhaustedheradministrativeremedies.After $  careful_perscrutation_Ԁofthebriefsandrecord,weaffirmthe   judgmentbelow. ,|   I.BACKGROUND  (  ` Thisappealfollowsadismissalforfailuretostatea  claimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.SeeFed.R.Civ.P. L 12(b)(6). #  2      ׀Consequently,weacceptthewellpleadedfactsastrue H andindulgeallreasonableinferencestherefromintheplaintiff's  favor._LaChapelle_v.BerkshireLifeIns.Co.,142F.3d507,508 \ (1stCir.1998).Weaugmentthosefactswithfactsextractable X fromdocumentationannexedtoorincorporatedbyreferenceinthe   complaintandmatterssusceptibletojudicialnotice.SeeInre `  Colonial_Mortg_.BankersCorp.,324F.3d12,14(1stCir.2003);see  \  also_Beddall_v.StateSt.Bank&TrustCo.,137F.3d12,17(1st   Cir.1998)("When,asnow,acomplaint'sfactualallegationsare d  expresslylinkedto"andadmittedlydependentupon"adocument `  (theauthenticityofwhichisnotchallenged),thatdocument   effectivelymergesintothepleadingsandthetrialcourtcan h reviewitindecidingamotiontodismissunderRule12(b)(6)."). d Moreover,thedistrictcourtappropriatelymayconsiderthewhole  ofadocumentintegraltoorexplicitlyrelieduponinacomplaint, l evenifthatdocumentisnotannexedtothecomplaint.SeeClorox h Co.P.R.v.Proctor&Gamble_Comm'l_ԀCo.,228F.3d24,32(1stCir.  2000). p   ` Applyingthesetenetstotheinstantrecordenablesusto !l" minecertainadditionalnuggetsofinformation.Thecorrespondence "$ betweenJorge'sattorneyandtheEqualEmploymentOpportunity t$& Commission(_EEOC_)"mostnotably,therighttosueletterupon  &p!( whichJorgepredicatesherclaimofexhaustion"fallswithinthis '#* parameter.SotodoesJorge'snoticeofretirement.Withthisin x)$, mind,werehearsetherelevantfacts. $+t&. _ ` Between1973and2001,JorgeworkedfortheArmyandAir  ForceExchangeServices(AAFES),acommissaryprogramformilitary \ personneladministeredbytheDepartmentofDefense.In1979,she X becametheretailmanagerofToyland,anAAFESoperatedstoreon   thepremisesofFortBuchanan(whichislocatedinGuaynabo,Puerto `  Rico).Jorgeremainedinthispositionfornearlytwodecades  \  until,attheageoffiftyone,sheelectedtomakealateral   transfertotheBaseMuizShoppette(whichislocatedata  d  NationalGuardinstallationsometwelvemilesaway).Jorgeclaims, `  andthedefendantsdonotcontest,thatshewasamodelemployee   who,bothatToylandandattheShoppette,consistentlyexceeded h salesandperformancetargetssetbyseniormanagement. d  ` JorgebeganworkingattheShoppettein1998.Soon  thereafter,AAFESassignedDebraBaynardtooverseeitsoperations l intheregion.TherelationshipbetweenBaynardandJorgequickly h turnedfrosty.FromJorge'spointofview,Baynardalteredthe  workplacebyinsistingupon,andrigorouslyenforcing,anEnglish p  onlypolicyandbyunderminingJorge'smanagerialauthorityin !l" insidiousways.WhenJorgecomplainedaboutBaynard'spoliciesand "$ practices,Baynardallegedlymadederogatorycommentsabouther t$& age.  &p!(  ` Thesituationcametoaheadearlyin2000when,during '#* Jorge'svacation,Baynardunilaterallytransferredherbacktoher x)$, formerpositionatToylandandfilledthepositionshehad_occupied $+t&. atthe_Shoppette_Ԁwithayounger,lessexperiencedmanwhospoke  onlyEnglish.AfterJorge'svacationendedonMarch4,2000,she \ metwith_Baynard_,whoservedformalnoticeofthejobshiftwithout X offeringJorgeanyexplanationforit.    ` Jorgerefusedtoreportfordutyat_Toyland_.Instead, `  sheexhaustedheraccruedvacationtimeandsickleavewhiletrying  \  togetherselfreinstatedatthe_Shoppette_.Evenafterherefforts   provedunsuccessful,sherefusedtoassumeherdutiesat_Toyland_. d  Induecourse,_AAFES_Ԁinformedherthat,pursuanttosettledagency `  regulations,herextendedabsencehadledtotheforfeitureofany   rightshemayhavehadtoregainherpositionatthe_Shoppette_. h Jorgewasgiventwooptionsatthatjuncture:returnto_Toyland_Ԁor d takeearlyretirement.Shechosethelatteroptionand,onApril  17,2001,submittedanoticeof"involuntaryearlyretirement," l retroactivetoMarch30,2001. h  II.TRAVELOFTHECASE    ` Jorgedidnotletsleepingdogslie.Herfirst   initiativecameintheformofanoticeletter,datedMay8,2001, 8!" sentonherbehalftothe_EEOC_.Thatletterannouncedher "4$ intentiontosueforagediscrimination.Followingtheexpiration $& ofathirtydaywaitingperiod,theagencygrantedJorgeleaveto <&!( sueunderthe_ADEA_.See29U.S.C.633a(d).Severalmonthsthen '8#*  passedwithnofurtheraction. )$, _ ` OnApril1,2002,Jorgecommencedanactioninthe   federaldistrictcourt,seekingreliefunder,interalia,theADEA \ andTitleVII.Inhercomplaint,Jorgeallegedthatshewas X humiliatedbothbyBaynard'sageistcommentsandbytheEnglish   onlyrequirement,andthattheinvoluntarytransfertoToyland `  exacerbatedthisstateofaffairs.Shealsocharacterizedher  \  earlyretirement,forthefirsttime,asaconstructivedischarge.    ` Jorge'scomplaintnamedabevyofdefendants,including d  theSecretaryofDefense,AAFES,Baynard,twootherAAFESmanagers `  whohadassistedBaynardinfacilitatingthetransfer,thespouses   andconjugalpartnershipsoftheindividualdefendants,andfour h unidentifieddefendants(apparentlysuedasplaceholders).Jorge d experienceddifficultyinservingtheindividualdefendants(other  thanSecretaryRumsfeld).Shediscussedthisproblemwiththe l AssistantUnitedStatesAttorney(AUSA)whowashandlingthecase. h TheAUSAsuggestedthatshedismisstheactionwithoutprejudice,  seeFed.R.Civ.P.41(a)(1),getherducksinarow,andthen p  refile.Eventually,Jorgeembracedthatsuggestionandmovedto !l" dismissthecomplaintwithoutprejudice.Thegovernmentconsented, "$ andthedistrictcourtgrantedthemotiononSeptember27,2002. t$&  ` Jorgecommencedanewaction,identicaltothefirstin  &p!( allrespects,onMarch4,2003.Thatactionendedintheorderof '#* dismissalthatundergirdsthisappeal.Wepausetoexplicatethe x)$, districtcourt's_reasoning. $+t&.  ` ThecourtfirstdeterminedthatJorge'ssupplemental  claimswerenotcognizablebecausethe_ADEA_ԀandTitleVIIcomprised \ theexclusiveremediesforclaimsofage,gender,andnational X origindiscrimination.Jorgev._Rumsfeld_,Civ.No.031224,slip   op.at4(_D.P.R._ԀMar.9,2004)(unpublished).Thecourtthen `  concludedthattheSecretaryofDefensewastheonlyproper  \  defendantinregardtothe_ADEA_ԀandTitleVIIclaimsanddismissed   theactionastoalltheotherdefendants.Id.at5.These d  rulingsarenotcontestedonappeal,andwedonotdiscussthem. `   ` WithrespecttoJorge'sTitleVIIclaimagainstthe   Secretary,thelowercourtnotedthatJorge'ssolecontactwiththe h _EEOC_Ԁwasherletterindicatinganintenttosueunderthe_ADEA_. d Id.at6.ItthereupondismissedherTitleVIIclaimwithout  prejudiceforfailureto"initiate[],muchlessexhaust[],"her l administrativeremedies.Id.at7.Finally,thecourtnotedthat h Jorge's_ADEA_Ԁclaimwassubjecttoatwoyearstatuteof  limitations.See_Rossiter_v.Potter,357F.3d26,27(1stCir. p  2004).Inlightofthatlimitationsperiod,thedistrictcourt !l" heldthatJorge,whohadinstitutedtheoperativeactionafull "$ threeyearsafterherinvoluntarytransfer,hadsuedtoolate. t$& Jorge,slipop.at8.Forthatreason,thecourtdismissedthe  &p!( _ADEA_Ԁclaimwithprejudice.Id.Thisappealfollowed. '#*   @+&. III.ANALYSIS    ` Onappeal,Jorgelimitsherassaulttothedistrict x court'sdispositionofher_ADEA_ԀandTitleVIIclaims.Weconsider $t theselinesofattackseparately.   @xx! A.The_ADEA_ԀClaim.  |   ` ThedistrictcourtheldthatJorge's_ADEA_Ԁclaimwastime D   barred.Id.Thatholdingrestedonadeterminationthatthecause @  ofactionaccruedatthetimeoftheinvoluntarytransferrather   thanatthetimeofJorge'sretirement.Seeid.(concludingthat H  thetransferconstituted"thegravamenofplaintiff's_ADEA_Ԁclaim"). D Jorgeassignserrortothatdetermination.Weconsiderher  argument,mindfulthatwhen,asnow,anorderofdismissalis L premisedontherunningoftheapplicablelimitationsperiod,we H mayaffirmonlyiftheRule12(b)(6)record"_leave[s_]nodoubtthat  [the]assertedclaimistimebarred."_LaChapelle_,142F.3dat509. P  ` The_ADEA_Ԁrequiresthatpersonnelactionsaffectingmost L employeeswhoarefortyyearsofageorolderbefreefromage   baseddiscrimination.29U.S.C.633a(a).Inonesense,the_ADEA_ T!" treatsfederalemployeesasaclassapartfromotheremployees. #P$ See_Rossiter_,357F.3dat2829(discussingthestatutoryscheme). $& Thatdifferenceimplicatesthe_ADEA_'senforcementmechanism: X&!( whereasmostemployeesmustfirstexhaustadministrativeremedies (T#* beforeinstitutingan_ADEA_Ԁaction,see29U.S.C.626(d),a )%, federalemployeehastheoptionofbypassingadministrative \+&. _remediesentirelyandsuingdirectlyinthefederaldistrictcourt.  Id.633a(c).Afederalemployeewhowishestoavailhimselfof \ thisbypassoptionmustnotifytheEEOCofhisintenttosuewithin X 180daysfollowingtheoccurrenceoftheallegedlyunlawful   practiceandthenobserveathirtydaywaitingperiodbeforefiling `  suit.Id.633a(d).TheEEOCisrequiredtonotifytheputative  \  defendantoftheemployee'sintenttosue,butithasnoauthority   toforestallthelitigation.Id. d   ` Inthisinstance,itisbeyondperadventurethatJorge `  gavenoticeofherintenttosueandthatthethirtydaycooling   offperiodelapsed.Butbecauseanactionprosecutedpursuantto h 29U.S.C.633a(c)issubjecttoatwoyearlimitationsperiod, d Rossiter,357F.3dat3435,itislessclearwhetherJorgebrought  heractionwithintheprescribedtime.Theuncertaintyarisesout l ofadifferenceofopinionabouttheaccrualdate. h  ` Ontheonehand,thegovernmentposits"andthedistrict  courtagreed"thatthelastindependentactofallegedage p  discriminationoccurredwhenBaynardunilaterallytransferredJorge !l" toToyland.Ontheotherhand,Jorgearguesthatherretirement "$ shouldbetreatedasanindependentactofdiscrimination.The t$& choiceofanaccrualdatemakesadispositivedifferencehere.  &p!( JorgecommencedthisactiononMarch4,2003.Iftheaccrualdate '#* isthedateofthetransfer,whichoccurredduring,orjustafter x)$, theendofJorge'svacation(forsimplicity'ssake,weshalluse_an $+t&. approximatedateofMarch4,2000),her_ADEA_Ԁclaimistimebarred.  Ifhowever,theaccrualdateisthedateofherretirement(which \ tookplaceonApril17,2001,retroactivetoMarch30,2001), #  3      ׀her X _ADEA_Ԁclaimistimely.    ` Jorge'sargumentproceedsonthebasisofasupposed `  constructivedischarge.Thatistheoreticallyfeasible:a  \  constructivedischargecanconstituteanadverseemploymentaction   underthe_ADEA_.See,e.g.,Suarezv.Pueblo_Int'l_,Inc.,229F.3d d  49,54(1stCir.2000)(explainingthatachargewilllieifthe `  employerhas"_engag[ed_]inacalculated,ageinspiredeffortto   forceanemployeetoquit").Bythesametoken,anofferofan h earlyretirementpackagesometimescanbeavehiclefora d constructivedischarge:aworkerwhoispresentedwithsucha  packagecanbesaidtobeconstructivelydischargedifherrefusal l toaccepttheofferwillresultinworkorworkingconditionsso h onerousordisagreeablethatareasonablepersonwouldfeel  compelledtoforsakeemploymentratherthantosubmitherselfto p  manifoldindignities.Vegav.KodakCaribbean,Ltd.,3F.3d476, !l" 480(1stCir.1993).Therationalebehindthisruleisrootedin "$ adesiretoensurethatanemployerbentondismissinganemployee t$& foragerelatedreasonscannotskirtCongress'sclearprohibition  &p!( onsuchdiscriminationbyindirection.SeeSuarez,229F.3dat54. '#*  ` AlthoughJorgewouldhaveusbelievethattheemployer's  offerofearlyretirementherewastantamounttoaconstructive \ discharge(and,thus,anindependentactofdiscriminationgiving X risetoher_ADEA_Ԁclaim),hercomplaint"evenwhenreadwithfull   deferencetoitsfactualallegations"failstobearoutthis `  assertion.Jorge'stroublesevidentlystemmedfromthesequenceof  \  eventsexemplifyingtheharassingbehaviorofhernewsupervisor.   Thatsequenceofeventsbeganin1998andculminatedintheorder d  transferringherto_Toyland_.Jorgerefusedtoacceptthat `  transfer,eventhoughitentailednolossofpay,benefits,status,   orthelike. #  4      ׀Becausethattransferentailednotangible h diminution,itdidnot,withoutmore,sinktothelevelof d indignitynecessarytomakeoutaprimafaciecaseofconstructive  discharge.SeeSuarez,229F.3dat56.Here,thereisno"more"; l Jorge'scomplaintisdevoidofanyallegationsindicatingthat,by h acceptingthetransfer,shewouldhavebeensubjectedtothekind  ofindignitiesagainstwhichthe_ADEA_Ԁstandsguard. p   ` NordoesJorgeallegeadiscriminatorymotivebehind !l" _AAFES_'sdirectivethatshereportto_Toyland_Ԁortakeearly "$ retirement.WhenJorgerefusedtoacceptthetransfer,shedidnot t$& resign,butremainednominallyin_AAFES_'semploy,drawingsalary  &p!( _andbenefitsfromheraccumulatedvacationtimeandsickleave  whileprotestingthetransferadministratively.Byallaccounts, \ itwastherefusaltoreportforworkandthepassageoftimethat X ledtoAAFES'sultimatum,andJorgedoesnotsuggestthatthis   actionwasanythingotherthanstandardoperatingprocedure.Thus, `  theToylandtransferconstitutedthelastindependent  \  discriminatoryactvisiteduponher"inthedistrictcourt's   phrase,itconstitutedthe"gravamenof[p]laintiff'scomplaint," d  Jorge,slipop.at8"andtheemployer'sultimatumthatsheaccept `  thetransferorretireearlywasmerelyaninevitableconsequence   ofthataction.ItfollowsthattheADEAlimitationsperiodruns h fromthedatethetransferorderwasmade. d  ` Themostpertinentauthorityforthispropositionisthe  SupremeCourt'sdecisioninDelawareStateCollegev.Ricks,449 l U.S.250(1980).There,acollegedeniedtenuretoafaculty h memberwhoallegedthatthedenialwasattributabletonational  origindiscrimination.Id.at25254.Theadministrationthen p  offeredthefacultymemberaoneyearcontract,notsubjectto !l" renewal.Id.at253.Theofferwasacceptedand,aftertheyear "$ hadrun,thefacultymemberlefttheschool'semploy.Hethen t$& sued.TheCourtdeemedthecasetimebarred,rejectingthefaculty  &p!( member'scontentionthathisemploymentdiscriminationclaim '#* accruedfromtheexpirationofhisterminalcontract.Id.at257 x)$, 58.TheCourtheldthattheplaintiffhadneitherallegednor $+t&. proved"thatthemannerinwhichhisemploymentwasterminated  differeddiscriminatorilyfromthemannerinwhichtheCollege \ terminatedotherprofessorswhoalsohadbeendeniedtenure."Id. X at258.Absentsuchanallegation,theplaintiff'slossof   employmentwasmerelyan"inevitableconsequence"oftheearlier `  (timebarred)tenuredecision,andcouldnotconstitutea  \  separatelyactionableevent.Id.at25758.Inshort,"the   criticaldatumisthepointintimeatwhichthediscriminatoryact d  occurred,"notthepointatwhichitseffectsbecamemost `  injurious.Morrisv.Gov'tDev.Bank,27F.3d746,749(1stCir.   1994). h  ` WefindthesamedeficiencyinJorge'scomplaint.She d hasnotpledthatthechoiceultimatelygivenherbyAAFESdiffered  discriminatorilyfromthewayinwhichtheorganizationhandled l personnelmattersinvolvingother,similarlysituatedemployees h (i.e.,thosewhohadrefusedtoacceptlateraltransfersandwho  hadexhaustedtheirvacationandsickleavetime).Norhasshe p  explainedhowtheemployer'sreturnorretireultimatumdifferedin !l" anyrespectfromtheemployer'sstandardresponsetoyounger, "$ similarlysituatedemployees.Here,asinRicks,themere t$& continuityoftheemploymentrelationship,inandofitself,isnot  &p!( enough"toprolongthelifeofacauseofaction."Ricks,449U.S. '#*  at257;accordCampbellv.BankBoston,327F.3d1,11(1stCir. x)$, 2003);Am.Airlines,Inc.v.CardozaRodriguez,133F.3d111,123  (1stCir.1998).  #  5       \   ` JorgemakesalastditchefforttoresuscitateherADEA X claimbyarguingthattheoperativetollingdatewasApril1,2002   (thedatewhenshefiledherfirstaction,laterdismissed)rather `  thanMarch4,2003(thedatewhenshecommencedtheaction  \  presentlyonappeal).Thisargumentishopeless:March4,2003   wasthecorrecttollingdateforthestatuteoflimitations d  calculation. `   ` Avoluntarydismissalwithoutprejudiceresultsina   tabularasa.Itrenderstheproceedingsnullandvoidandleaves h thepartiesinthesamepositionasiftheactionhadneverbeen d prosecuted.Nat'lR.R.PassengerCorp.v.Int'lAss'nof  Machinists,915F.2d43,48(1stCir.1990);InrePiperAircraft l Distrib.Sys.AntitrustLitig.,551F.2d213,219(8thCir.1977). h Consequently,"aprescriptiveperiodisnottolledbyfilinga  complaintthatissubsequentlydismissedwithoutprejudice." p  ChicoVlezv.RocheProds.,Inc.,139F.3d56,59(1stCir._1998). !l"  ` EquallyunavailingisJorge'scontentionthatthestatute  oflimitationsshouldbeequitablyextendedduetoherattorney's \ misplacedrelianceonthe_AUSA_'ssuggestionthatshedismissthe X firstactionbecauseofthedifficultyshewasexperiencingin   locatingsomeoftheindividualdefendants.Whilethedoctrineof `  equitableestoppelmaybeinvokedwhen"adefendant'sconduct  \  causesaplaintifftodelaybringinganactionorpursuingaclaim   heorshewasentitledtoinitiatebylaw,"Kelleyv.NLRB,79F.3d d  1238,1247(1stCir.1996),thisrequiresaffirmativemisconduct, `  seeid.;seealso_Lavery_v.Marsh,918F.2d1022,1028(1stCir.   1990).Jorgemakesnosuchclaim"norwouldthepleadedfacts h supportone. d  ` Tosaymoreaboutthe_ADEA_Ԁclaimwouldbepointless.For  theforegoingreasons,weaffirmthedistrictcourt'sdismissalof l thatclaimastimebarred. h @LL B.TheTitleVIIClaim.    ` ThedistrictcourtdismissedJorge'sTitleVIIclaim   withoutprejudiceforfailuretoexhaustadministrativeremedies. 8!" Jorge,slipop.at7.Jorgeassignserrortothisukaseaswell. "4$ Sheisfishinginanemptystream. $&  ` Unlikethe_ADEA_,TitleVIIdoesnotsparefederal <&!( employeesfromrunningtheadministrativegauntlet.Anindividual '8#* whohassuffereddiscriminationatthehandsofafederalemployer )$, onaccountofrace,color,religion,gender,ornationalorigin @+&. _mustfileanadministrativecomplaintwiththeEEOCwithin180days  oftheallegedunlawfulemploymentpractice.See42U.S.C. \ 2000e15(c)(1)&16(c).Theemployeemaycommenceacivilaction X againstheremployerif,andonlyif,theEEOChasdismissedthe   administrativecomplaintorhasitselffailedtobeginacivil `  actionwithin180daysoftheoriginalEEOCfiling. #  6      ׀Id.2000e  \  5(f)(1).Theemployeethenmustsuewithinninetydays.Id.The   ninetydayperiodbeginstorunfromthetimethattheAttorney d  GeneralnotifiestheemployeeeitherthattheEEOChasdismissed `  thechargeorthatthegovernmenthasfailedtoaddressthe   employee'sgrievance(byreachinganegotiatedsettlementorby h commencinglitigationonherbehalf).Seeid.;seealsoClockedile d v.N.H.Dep'tofCorr.,245F.3d1,3(1stCir.2001).Itisthus  apparentthat"[j]udicialrecourseunderTitleVII...isnota l remedyoffirstresort."MoralesVallellanesv.Potter,339F.3d h 9,18(1stCir.2003).   ` Inlightofthestatutoryscheme,itisunsurprising p  that,inaTitleVIIcase,aplaintiff'sunexcusedfailureto !l" exhaustadministrativeremedieseffectivelybarsthecourthouse "$ door.See,e.g.,Duncanv.Manager,Dep'tofSafety,397F.3d t$& 1300,1314(10thCir.2005);Duncanv.DeltaConsol.Indus.,Inc.,  &p!( 371F.3d1020,102425(8thCir.2004);Taylorv.BooksAMillion, '#* Inc.,296F.3d376,37879(5thCir.2002);seealsoBonillav.  MueblesJ.J.Alvarez,Inc.,194F.3d275,278(1stCir.1999).  \ Exhaustionhastwokeycomponents:thetimelyfilingofacharge X withtheEEOCandthereceiptofarighttosueletterfromthe   agency.SeeMcDonnellDouglasCorp.v.Green,411U.S.792,798 `  (1973);McKinnonv.KwongWahRest.,83F.3d498,504(1stCir.  \  1996).    ` JorgesaysthatshefiledachargewiththeEEOCwithin d  theprescribedperiodandthattheEEOC,inturn,sentheraright `  tosueletter.Butthatisahalftruth.Thechargewasnota   chargeatall,but,rather,anoticeofintenttosue.Perhaps h moreimportantly,boththesocalled"charge"andthesubsequent d righttosueletterconcernedonlyherADEAclaim;sheneverfiled  aTitleVIIclaimwiththeEEOC,andherattempttopiggybacka l nonexistentTitleVIIfilingonanADEAfilingdoesnothold h water.   ` ATitleVIIsuitmayextendasfaras,butnotbeyond, p  theparametersoftheunderlyingadministrativecharge.SeeFine !l" v.GAFChem.Corp.,995F.2d576,578(5thCir.1993).Thisdoes "$ notmeanthatthescopeofthesuitisinevitablylimitedtothe t$& allegationsintheadministrativecomplaint,butitisnonetheless  &p!( constrainedbythoseallegationsinthesensethatthejudicial '#* complaintmustbearsomecloserelationtotheallegations x)$, presentedtotheagency.Cf.Clockedile,245F.3dat6(holding $+t&. thatretaliationclaimsarepreservediftheretaliationis  "reasonablyrelatedtoandgrowsoutof"thediscriminationcharged \ intheadministrativecomplaint).Jorge'sfilingsdonotpassthat X test.    ` TheADEAandTitleVIIcoverseparateanddistinct `  subjects.SeeLennonv.Rubin,166F.3d6,8(1stCir.1999)  \  (explainingthatagediscriminationclaimsarenotcognizableunder   TitleVII).Moreover,thetwostatutesoperateindifferent d  administrativeuniversesvis%  visfederalemployees.Compare29 `  U.S.C.633a(c),with42U.S.C.2000e16(c).Amergerofthe   twoschemesbyjudicialfiatwoulddestroytheverypurposeof h exhaustionbydeprivingtheEEOCoftheabilitytoresolveTitle d VIIdisputesintheconferenceroomratherthaninthecourtroom.  See42U.S.C.2000e5(b)("[T]heCommissionshallendeavorto l eliminateanysuchallegedunlawfulemploymentpracticebyinformal h methodsofconference,conciliation,andpersuasion.").  Accordingly,weholdthatneitherJorge'sADEAfilingnorthe p  ensuingrighttosueletterexhaustedheradministrativeremedies !l" forpurposesofherTitleVIIclaim. "$  ` Jorgehasafallbackposition.Evenifthedistrict t$& courtwascorrectinholdingthatheradministrativejourneywas  &p!( incompletewithrespecttoherTitleVIIclaim,Jorgeseeksto '#* persuadeusthatshenonethelessmayfindreliefunderthedoctrine x)$, ofequitabletolling.Wearenotconvinced. $+t&.  ` Tobesure,anemployee'sfailuretofollowthe  administrativeroutetoitsduecompletiondoesnotautomatically \ doomaTitleVIIclaim.Thechargefilingrequirementismandatory X butnotjurisdictional;therefore,itissubjecttoahostof   equitableexceptions.Zipesv.TransWorldAirlines,Inc.,455 `  U.S.385,393(1982);Bonilla,194F.3dat278.Indeference,  \  however,toTitleVII'scarefullycraftedtemporallimitations,we   invokethoseexceptionssparinglyandinterpretthemnarrowly.See d  Bonilla,194F.3dat278;Jensenv.Frank,912F.2d517,521(1st `  Cir.1990).Thus,anemployeeisgenerallynotentitledtoavail   herselfofthedoctrineofequitabletollingiftheproceduralflaw h thatpromptedthedismissalofherclaimisofherownmaking.See d Bonilla,194F.3dat279("Generallyspeaking"peculiar  circumstancesmayleavesomewiggleroom"equitabletollingisnot l appropriateunlessaclaimantmissesafilingdeadlinebecauseof h circumstanceseffectivelybeyondhercontrol(suchaswhenher  employeractivelymisleadsher,andshereliesonthatmisconduct p  toherdetriment)."). !l"  ` Jorgeprettymuchignoredthisissueintheproceedings "$ beforethedistrictcourt.Sheraisesitinthiscourt,butshe t$& hasofferednodevelopedargumentationastowhyhercaseshould  &p!(  notcomewithinthegeneralruleratherthanwithinthelong_Ԅodds '#* exceptiontoit.Consequently,sheisnotentitledtoinvokethe  equitabletollingdoctrinehere. #  7       \  IV.CONCLUSION  X  ` Weneedgonofurther.Discerningnoerrorinthe   districtcourt'swellreasoneddecision,weaffirmthejudgment |  below. ( x   Affirmed.