Case ID: f-appx_31/html/0555-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Stephen J. ZARSKI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. John E. POTTER, Postmaster General; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 01-16158. D.C. No. CV-99-01396-KJD.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted March 11, 2002 .
    Decided March 20, 2002.
    Before CANBY, BEEZER and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.
    
      
       John E. Potter, Postmaster General, is substituted for his predecessor in office pursuant to Fed. R.App. P. 43(c)(2).
    
    
      
      The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
   MEMORANDUM

Stephen Zarski appeals the district court’s judgment dismissing his action alleging race and gender discrimination and retaliation because Zarski failed to exhaust his administrative remedies. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. Vinieratos v. United States, 939 F.2d 762, 768 & n. 5 (9th Cir.1991). We affirm.

Contrary to Zarski’s contention, the district court did not convert USPS’ motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment. See Ass’n of Am. Med. Colleges v. United States, 217 F.3d 770, 778 (9th Cir. 2000) (holding that courts may consider extra-pleading material in evaluating a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction).

The district court properly dismissed Zarski’s action because he failed to exhaust administrative remedies by filing an Equal Employment Opportunity complaint within fifteen days of receiving notice of his right to do so. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.106(b); Leorna v. United States Dep’t of State, 105 F.3d 548, 551 (9th Cir. 1997). The district court properly concluded that Zarski did not establish that he was entitled to equitable tolling. See Leorna, 105 F.3d at 551.

AFFIRMED. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.