2007 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-24-2007 

# O rdi l le v . U SA P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 05-5062

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2007 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" Or d i l le v . U SA" (2007). 2007 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1749. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2007/1749J udge V an A nt w erpen part i ci pat ed vi a audi o confe r ence . * T h e H o n o rab le Jo h n R
. P ad o v a, D istri ct Ju d g e f o r t h e U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt ** fort he East ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a, s i t t i ng bydes i gnat i on. NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT
N o. 05- 5062
M AR Y O RD I LLE; RI CH AR D O RD I LLE,

A p p e llan ts
v. UNI T E D S T AT E S OF AM E RI CA ; UNI TE D ST ATE S DEP ARTM ENT OF AGRI CULT URE

O n A p p e a l f

ro m th e U n ited S tate s D istric t C o u rt fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( C as e N o. 01- cv- 03503) D istric t Ju d g e : H o n o ra b le J e ro m e B . S im a n d le

____________ A r gued D ece m ber12, 2006
Be f o r e : FUEN TES a n d VA N A NTW ERPEN , C i r cui tJudges , a n d P ADOVA , * * * D is t r i ct Judge
. ( Fi l ed: J anuary24, 2007)2

G er al d J
. W i l l i ams ( A r gued) W i l l i ams, C uker , B er ezof s ky W oodl and Fal l s C orpor at e C ent er 210 L ake D r i ve East , Sui t e 101 C herr yH i l l , N ew J er s ey08002- 1163 C o u n se l fo r Ap

p e lla n ts C h risto p h e r J. C h ristie U ni t ed St at es A t t or ney L oui s J
. B i zza r r i ( A r gued) A s s i s t antU ni t ed St at es A t t or ney O ffi ce of t he U ni t ed St at es A t t or ney 401 M ar ketSt r eet , 4t h Fl oor C amden, N ew J er s ey08101 C ouns el f orAppel l ees

___________

OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

___________ P A D O V A , D is tr i ct

Judge M ar yand R i char d O r di l l e appe al t he or der of t he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tfort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s eygr ant ing su m m aryj udgm enti n favorof t he D epart m entof A gr i cul tur e. A t iss ue i s w hethert he O r di l l es ’ cl ai m s of di s cr i m i nat i on i n vi ol at i on of t he E qual C r edi tO ppor tuni t yA ctar e barr ed byt he A ct ’ s s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons , as t hats t atut e w as
m odi fi ed byPubl i c Law 105- 277, T i t l e V I I § 7 4 1
. W e have j ur i s di ct i on pur s uantt o 28 U. S
. C. § 1 2 9 1
. W e a f

f i r m. I. B eca us e w e w r i t e s ol el y for t he par t i es , w e s etfor t h onl yt hos e fa ct s nece s s aryt o our3

analy si s. M ar yand R i char d O rdil le a re mar r i ed bl ueberr yfarm er s w i t h a l ong hi s t or yof d ifficu lt ies w ith the F arm S erv ice A g en cy(“F S A ”), a b u rea u o f th e U n it ed S tat es D ep artm ent of A gr i cul tur e ( t he “U SD A ”) , and i t s pr edec es s or , t he Far m H om e A dm i ni s t r at i on. T hey cl ai m t hatt he FSA di s cr i m i nat ed agai ns tt hem i n connec t i on w i t h appl i cat i ons forand
ex ist ing ex tens ion s o f c red it , o n the b asis o f t h eir n ati o n al o ri g in, m arit al st atus an d g en d er, in v io la tio n o f

th e E q u a l C re d it O p p o rt u n ity A c t, 1 5 U .S .C . § 1 6 9 1 , et s eq. (t h e “ E C O A ”). T he O r di l l es s enta l et t ert o D an G l i ckman, Secr et aryof t he D epart m entof A gr i cul tur e, dat ed J anuary3, 1997, compl ai ni ng aboutt hei rt r eatm entbyt h e F S A and
r eques t i ng an i nves t i gat i on. T he O r di l l es encl os ed w i t h t hei rl et t era l engthyaff i davi tdat ed J anuary6, 1997, r ecount i ng t hei rm i s t r eatm entbyvar i ous offi ci al s of t he FSA betw een 1982 and O ct ober1996 ( t he l et t er and affi davi t ar e re ferr ed t o col l ect i vel y as t he “J anuary1997
com plai nt”)
. T he Janu ary19 97 com plai nt r eferr ed to une t hical t reatm ent of t he O rdi l l es’
or i gi nal l oan appl i cat i on; t he fai l ur e of FSA offi ci al s t o i nfor m t he O r di l l es aboutgr antand l oan oppor tuni t i es m ade a vai l abl e t o ot herfarm er s ; t he fa i l ur e o f FSA offi ci al s t o pr ovi de
a ss ista n c e w h e n th e O rd ill e s su f f e re d w e a th e r re late d c ro p f a ilu re s; th e f

a ilu re o f th e F S A to refi nan ce t he O rdi l l es’ l oan atan agreed up on i nter estrat e; t he fa i l ure of the FS A t o assi st t he O r di l l es i n t he s al e orconvey ance of t h e farm t o anotherfarm er ; and the r efus al of t he F S A to a c c e p t a c o n v e y a n c e o f th e f a rm to th e F S A in sa tisf a c tio n o f th e O rd ill e s’ d e b t. I m por t ant l y , t he J anuary1997 compl ai ntdoes notal l ege thatt he mi s t r eatm entof t he O r di l l es4

w as a r es ul tof unl aw ful di s cr i m i nat i on. O n F e b ru a ry2 0 , 1 9 9 7 , th e U S D A re sp o n d e d to th e O rd ill e s’ c o m p lain t, reje c tin g th e ir cl ai m s of m i s t r eatm ent . O n O ct ober1997, i n r es pons e t o a r eques tfori nfor m at i on aboutt he O r di l l es ’ compl ai ntm ad e b y M ar yO r di l l e, D r . J er emy S. W u, D eputyD i r ect orof t he U SD A ’ s O ffi ce of C i vi l R i ght s ( t he “O C R ”) , w r ot e t o M aryO r di l l e s t at i ng t hatt he Pr ogr am I n v esti g at i ons D i vi s i on, w hi ch pr oces s es di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai nt s bypar t i ci pant s i n t he U SD A ’ s fi nanci al as s i s t ance pr ogr ams, di d not have an act i ve compl ai ntfr om herand s ent hera compl ai ntfor m . O n J anuary1, 1998, t he O r di l l es fi l ed another c o m pl ai nt , t hi s one di r ect ed t o t he O C R , compl ai ni ng of di s cr i m i nat i on bas ed on thei r nat i onal or i gi n, s ex and
m ar i t al stat u s and att achi ng a l et t er , dat ed J anuary1, 1998, s et t i ng outt hei rhi s t or yof pr ob l e ms wi t h t h e F S A. Th e l e t t e r s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e p e a t e d t h e h i s t o r y o f t h e Or d i l l e s ’ FSA t r ans act i ons cont ai ned i n t he J anuary1997 compl ai nt , butadded thatM aryO r di l l e had be en di s cr i m i nat ed a gai ns tbas ed on hers ex and na t i onal or i gi n ( I t al i an A m er i can) beca us e s he h ad n o t bee n all o w ed to ap p ly fo r t h e o ri g inal F S A loan w ith o u t her h u sb an d
. T h e Ja n u ary 1, 1998 l et t eral s o cont ai n s the fol l ow i ng s t at ement w hi ch al l eges di s cr i m i nat i on bas ed on M aryO r di l l e’ s s ex, nat ion al o r i gi n and mar i t al s t atus : “W e s houl d nothave be en d isc rim in a ted [ sic ] b e c a u se m y h u sb a n d h a d a jo b , b e c a u se I w a s a n Ita lian A m e ric a n f e m a le
w or k i n g a f

a r m, ma r r i e d o rd e n i e d o u rr i g h t s , whi l e o t h e rf a r me r s wer e g i v e n e qual oppor tuni t i es and pr ot ect ed. ” A pp. atA 61. O n Sept ember 17, 1999, R honda D avi s , C hi ef of t he St atut e of L i m i t at i on di vi s i on atPubl i c Law 105- 277, T i t l e V I I § 741, w ai ved the EC O A ’ s s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons for 1 cert ai n cl ai m s br oughtagai ns tt he U SD A w hi ch w er e fi l ed admi ni s t r at i vel yw i t h t he U SD A pr i ort o J ul y1, 1997 ( “el i gi bl e cl ai m s ”) , and s ubs t i tut ed a ne w s t atut e of lim ita tio n s f

o r t h o s e c la im s . T h is e x te n s io n is re f e rr e d to a s th e “ S e c tio n 7 4 1 w a iv e r.” 5 t he O C R , s ent a for m l et t er t o t he O r di l l es w hi ch s t at ed thatt he O C R had r ece nt l yr evi ew ed t hei rdi s cr i m i nat i on compl ai nti n acc or dance w i t h Sect i on 741 of P ubl i c L aw 105- 277 and 1 det er m i ned thatt hei rpr e- J ul y1, 1 9 9 7 co m pl ai ntm ett he r equi r ement s fora w ai verof t he
s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons . T he l et t eral s o expl ai ned how t he O r di l l es coul d s eek a dm i ni s t r at i ve
r evi ew of t hei rE C O A cl ai m , r efe r r ed t o as t he Sect i on 741 pr oces s . O n O ct ober28, 1999, R os al i nd G r ay , D i r ect or , O C R , s enta l et t ert o t he O r di l l es encl os i ng a fi nal deci s i on of t he U SD A det er m i ni ng t hatt her e had been no di s cr i m i nat i on i n t hei rcas e. O n D ece m ber6, 1999, t he O r di l l es r ece i ved a s econd for m l et t er fr om R honda D avi s , near l y i dent i cal t o t he Sept ember 17, 1999 l et t erand w i t h t he s ame docketnum ber
. T he D ece m ber6, 1999 l et t er agai n inf o r m ed the O r di l l es t hatt hei rpr e- J ul y1, 1997 compl ai ntm ett he r equi r ement s for a S ect i on 74 1 w ai ver of the st atute of l i m i t at i on s. S o m e t i m e i n 200 0, t he O rdi l l es recei ved an und at ed l et t er from R ho nd a D a v is inf o rm ing them that they w ere n o t el igible f o r t h e S ec ti o n 7 4 1 w aive r: T h is is to a d v ise y o u th a t y o u a re n o t elig ib le to p a rticip a te undert he Sect i on 741 pr oces s . Y ourcase w as det er m i ned i nel i gi bl e forSect i on 741 p roces s i ng beca us e y ourcompl ai nt w as notfi led w it h U SD A pr i ort o J ul y1, 1997. O urr ecor ds sh o w th a t y o u r c o m p lain t w a s f iled o n Ja n u a r y 1 , 1 9 9 8 . T h is el i gi bi l i t y r evi ew i s a fi nal det er m i nat i on deny ing y our compl ai ntas el i gi bl e t o be pr oces s ed undert he pr ovi s i ons of Sect i on 741.6

A p p . a t A 6 8
. O n O ct ober18, 2000, the O r di l l es as ked thatt hi s det er m i nat i on be r evi ew ed byan A dm i ni s t r at i ve Law J udge ( “A L J ”) under t he S ect i on 741 pr oces s . O n D ece m ber8, 2000, t he A L J i s s ued hi s Pr opos ed D et er m i nat i on, deny i ng t he O r di l l es ’ compl ai ntas t i m e- bar r ed. T he A L J concl uded t hat t he O r di l l es ’ compl ai nt w as unt i m el y , and notel i gi bl e fora Sect i on 741 w ai ver , des pi t e the Sept ember 17 and D ece m ber6, 1999 l ett ers w hi ch s t at ed thatt he O rdil l es ’ pr e- J ul y1, 1997 compl ai ntm ett he r equi r ement s forw ai verof t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons . T he A L J s t at ed t hatt hos e l et t er s ’ “err oneous r efe r ence t o a ‘ pr e- J ul y1, 1997, compl ai nt ’ cannott r ans for m t he i nel i gi bl e C om pl ai nti n t hi s cas e, fi l ed on J anuary1, 1998, i n t o a n e l i g i b l e C o m p l a i n t w h i c h m u s t h a v e b e e n f i l e d p r i o r t o J u l y 1 , 1 9 9 7
. ” App. at A339. T h e O rd ill e s ap p e a led th e A L J’s P ro p o se d D e ter m in a tio n , a rg u in g th a t th e A L J e rro n e o u sly
cons i der ed J anuary1, 1998 t he dat e of thei rcompl ai n t, ignor i ng t hei rJ anuary1997 compl ai nt , and t hatt hei rJ anuary1, 1998 compl ai nt r el at ed bac k t o t he t i m el yfi l i ng of t he J a n u a ry 1 9 9 7 c o m p la in t. O n February1, 2001, t he U SD A adopt ed the P roposed D et er m i nat i on as i t s Fi nal D et er m i nat i on. T he Fi nal D et er m i nat i on found t hat t he O r di l l es ’ compl ai nt w as t i m e- bar r ed and r ej ect ed the O r di l l es ’ ar gum entr egar di ng r el at i on back of t he J anuary1, 1998 compl ai nt on t he gr ounds t hatt he J anuary1997 compl ai ntd i d nots peci fi cal l yas s er tdi s cr i m i nat i on b a se d o n se x , m a rital statu s o r na tio n a l o rig in
. T h e O rd ill e s ap p e a led th e F in a l D e c isio n to t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s Di s t r i c tCo u r tf o rt h e Di s t r i c to f

Ne w J e r s e yo n J u l y2 6 , 2 0 0 1
. On7

Sept ember 2 6 , 2 0 0 5 , i n a t h o r o u g h a n d wel l
- r e a s o n e d o p i n i o n , t h e Di s t r i c tCou r tg r a n t ed
s um m aryj udgm entt o U SD A , fi ndi ng t hat t he O r di l l es had not fi l ed a compl ai nt t hatm ett he el i gi bi l i t yr equi r ement s of Sect i on 741 and r ej ect ed the O r di l l es ’ appea l
. A pp. at44. II. T h e O rd ill e s a sk u s to f in d th a t th e D istric t C o u rt e rre d in d e ter m in in g th a t th e ir E C O A cl ai m w as notel i gi bl e fora Sect i on 741 w ai verand w as , t her efor e, t i m e- barr ed. O ur
s t and ard o f rev ie w of a gr antof s um m aryj udgm enti s pl enary . See Fed. H om e Loan M or t gage C orp. v. Scot t s dal e I ns . C o. , 316 F. 3d 431, 443 ( 3d C i r . 2003)
. I n r evi ew i ng t he dec i s i o n o f t h e Di s t r i c t Cou r t , we a s s e s s t h e r e c o r d u s i n g t h e s a me s u mma r y j udgm ent
s t andar d t hatgui des t he di s t r i ct cour t s . See Farr el l v. Pl ant er s L i fes aver s C o. , 206 F. 3d 271, 27 8 (3d C i r. 20 00 ). T o prevai l on a m oti on for sum m aryj ud gm ent, t he m ov i ng part ym ust d e m o n stra te “ th a t th e re is n o g e n u in e iss u e a s to a n ym a ter ial f a c t an d th a t th e m o v in g p a rty i s ent i t l ed t o a j udgm entas a mat t erof l aw . ” Fed. R
. C i v. P. 56( c)
. T he part i es agr ee that th e re a re n o d isp u ted iss u e s o f m a ter ial f

a c t an d th a t th e iss u e s b e f o re u s a re p u re lyleg a l. III
. T h e O rd ill e s c o n ten d th a t th e D istric t C o u rt e rre d in g ra n tin g su m m a ryju d g m e n t to th e U S D A , arg u in g th a t th e U S D A w a iv e d th e S e c tio n 7 4 1 re q u ire m e n t th a t an e lig ib le c laim b e fil ed pr i ort o J ul y1, 1997 t hr ough t he l et t er s R honda D avi s s entt o t he O r di l l es on Sept ember 17, 1999 and D ece m ber6, 1999, and by r eac hi ng a deci s i on on t he m er i t s of t he O r di l l es’ d iscri m i nat i on cl ai m s on O ct ober28, 1999. I n t he eve ntt hatw e fi nd t hatt he8

el i gi bl e compl ai ntr equi r ement w as notw ai ved, t he O r di l les ar gue thatt hei rJ anuary1997 compl a i n t i s a n e l i g i b l e c o mpl a i n t p u r s u a n t t o Se c t i o n 7 4 1
. Th e y a l s o c o n t e n d t hat t he J anuary1, 1998 compl ai nt amended or per fec t ed t he J anuary 1997 compl ai ntand, t her efor e,
r el at es bac k t o t he fi l i ng of t he J anuary1997 compl ai nt , w hi ch w as fi l ed pr i ort o t he
e x p ir a tio n o f

th e tim e p e ri o d f

o r e lig ib le c la im s . A
. T he R el evantSt atut es T he EC O A “cr eat es a pr i vat e r i ght of act i on agai ns t a cr edi t or , i ncl udi ng t he U ni t ed St at es , 15 U
. S. C
. § 1691e( a) , w ho ‘ di s cr i m i nat es agai ns tanyappl i cant , w i t h r es pectt o any
as pectof a c r edi tt r ans act i on’ ‘ on t he bas i s of r ace , col or , r el i gi on, nat i onal or i gi n, s ex or
m ar i t al s t atus , or age’ or ‘ beca us e t he appl i canthas i n good fai t h exer ci s ed anyr i ghtunder t h i s c h a p t e r . ’ ” Ga r c i a v . J o h a n n s , 4 4 4 F
. 3 d 6 2 5 , 6 2 9 n . 4 ( D. C. Ci r . 2 0 0 6 ) ( q u o t i n g 1 5 U. S
. C. § 1 6 9 1 (a )). “ C re d it tra n sa c tio n s” a re d e f in e d b yth e re g u latio n s g o v e rn in g th e E C O A to i ncl ude “‘ every as pect of an appl i cant ’ s deal i ngs w i t h a cr edi t orr egar di ng an appl i cat i on for
cr edi toran exi s t i ng ext ens i on of cr edi t( i ncl udi ng, butnotl i m i t ed t o, i nfor m at i on
re q u ire m e n ts; in v e stig a tio n p ro c e d u re s; s tan d a rd s o f c re d itw o rth in e ss ; term s o f c re d it; fur ni s hi ng of cr edi ti nfor m at i on; r evoca t i on, al t er at i on, ort er m i nat i on of cr edi t ; and col l ect i on pr ocedur es )
. ’ ” I d. ( quot i ng 12 C
. F. R
. § 202. 2( m ) )
. T he EC O A t hus w ai ved the
s over ei gn i m m uni t yof t he U n it ed St at es , per m i t t i ng s ui t s agai ns tt he G overnm entfor di s cr i m i nat i on i n the pr ovi s i on of cr edi t . T he EC O A pr ovi des a tw o- y ears t atut e of l i m i t at i ons for cl ai m s m ade pur s uant t o t hat s t atut e. 15 U
. S. C
. § 1691e( f) ( “[N ] o s uch ac t i on9

sh all b e b rou g h t l ater tha n tw o y ea rs fro m the d ate o f t h e oc cu rren ce o f t h e violati o n . . . . ”). H ow ever , i n 1998, C ongr es s pas s ed, and the Pr es i dents i gned, an ext ens i on t o t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons forcert ai n el i gi bl e cl ai m s , t her ebyfurt herexpandi ng t he EC O A ’s w ai verof
s over ei gn i m m uni t ybyal l ow i ng cert ai n s ui t s t o be br oughtagai ns tt he G overnm entbey ond th e tw o -ye a r s ta tu te o f

lim ita tio n s . T he ext ensio n , Sect i on 741, Pub. L
. 105- 277, T i t l e V I I § 741; 112 St at . 2681- 30 ( 1998) ( r epr i nt ed i n 7 U
. S. C
. § 2279 not es ) , w as enac t ed i n r es pons e t o t he pl eas of A fr i canA m e ric a n f

a rm e rs w h o h a d su f

f e re d y e a rs o f

ra c ial d isc rim in a tio n in U S D A p ro g ra m s, b u t, beca us e o f a hi s t or yof i neff i ci encyi n t he handl i ng of di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai nt s byt he U SD A , w er e unabl e t o as s er tt hei rdi s cr i m i nat i on cl ai m s i n cour t pur s uant t o t he E C O A
. See P ig f o rd v . G lick m a n , 2 0 6 F .3 d 1 2 1 2 , 1 2 1 5 (D .C
. C ir. 2 0 0 0 ). T h e U S D A h a s e x p lain e d th a t, dur i ng t he 1980s and 1990s , i neff i ci enci es i n i t s r evi ew of ci vi l r i ght s compl ai nt s l ed t o t he
e x p ira tio n o f

th e sta tu te o f

lim itatio n s o n c laim s w h ic h h a d b e e n b ro u g h t ad m in istra tiv e ly wi t h i n t h e USDA b e f

o r e t h e USDA ma d e a de t e r mi na t i on o f t h o s e c l a i ms . S e e 6 3 F
. R. 67392 ( codi fi ed at7 C
. F. R
. Par t15f)
. T he Secr et aryof t he U SD A , t her efor e, “s o u ghtt he
e n a c tm e n t o f

leg isla tio n to w a iv e th e a p p lica b le sta tu tes o f lim itatio n s f

o r th o se in d iv id u a ls
w ho had fi l ed nonempl oy m entr el at ed di scrim ina t i on compl ai nt s w i t h U SD A al l egi ng di s cr i m i nat i on dur i ng t hatt i m e per i od. ” I d. Sect i on 741 r etr oac ti v ely ex t ended “ t he l i mi t a t i o n s p e r i o d f

o r i n d i v i d u a l s wh o h a d f i l e d a d mi n i s t r a t i v e c o mp l a i n t s wi t h t h e US DA betw een J anuary1, 1981, and J ul y1, 1997 foral l eged a ct s of d iscri m inat i on occurr i ng10

betw een J anuary1, 1981 and D ece m ber 31, 1996. ” G ar ci a, 444 F. 3d at629 n. 4 ( ci t i ng Pub. L . N o . 1 0 5 -2 7 7 , T itle V II § 7 4 1 , 1 1 2 S ta t. 2 6 8 1 ). S e c tio n 7 4 1 sta tes , in r e lev a n t p a rt, th a t: ( a) T o t he ext ent per m i t t ed by t he C ons t i tut i on, anyci vi l act i on t o o b t ai n r el i ef w i t h r es pectt o t he di s cr i m i nat i on al l eged i n an el i gi bl e compl ai nt , i f com m ence d not l at er t han 2 y ear s aft ert he dat e of the ena ct m entof t hi s A ct[O ct . 21, 1998] , s hal l notbe barr ed b yt he st atute of l i m i t at i on s. ( b) T he compl ai nantm ay , i n l i eu of fi l i ng a ci vi l act i on, s eek a det er m i nat i on on t he mer i t s o f the el i gi bl e compl ai ntbyt he D epart m entof A gr i cul tur e i f such c om pl ai ntw as fi l ed notl at er t han 2 y ear s aft ert he dat e of e nactm entof t hi s A ct[O ct . 21, 1 9 9 8 ]. P u b
. L
. 1 0 5 -27 7 , T it le V II § 7 4 1 (a), 1 1 2 S tat . 2 6 8 1 -30 (rep ri n ted i n 7 U
. S
. C
. § 2 2 7 9 n o tes). A n eli gibl e com plai nt i s defi ned byS ect i on 74 1 as:

a nonempl oy m ent r el at ed compl ai ntt hatw as fi l ed w i t h t he D ep artm entof A gr i cul tur e bef or e J ul y1, 1997 and al l eges di s cr i m i nat i on at anyt i m e dur i ng t he per i od begi nni ng on J anuary1, 1981 and endi ng D ece m ber31, 1996 – “( 1) i n vi ol at i on of t he Equal C r edi t O ppor tuni t yA ct( 15 U
. S. C
. 1961 ets eq. ) i n admi ni s t er i ng –

( A ) a fa r m ow ner s hi p, farm oper at ing or emer gencyl oan funde d from t he A gr i cul tur al C re d it I n s u ra n c e P ro g ra m A c c o u n t; . . . . P u b . L . 1 0 5 -2 7 7 , T itle V II § 7 4 1 (e ), 1 1 2 S ta t. 2 6 8 1 -3 1
. B
. W ai verof t he Sect i on 741 L i m i t at i ons Per i od T h e D istric t C o u rt re

jec ted th e O rd ill e s’ a rg u m e n t th a t th e U S D A w a iv e d th e e lig ib le11

compl ai ntr equi r ement of Sect i on 741( e) becau se Sect i on 741 i s a w ai verof s over ei gn im m u n ityth a t m u st b e stric tlyc o n stru e d in f a v o r o f th e G o v e rn m e n t an d th a t ca n n o t, t h e r e f o r e , b e wa i v e d
. S e e O r d i l l e v . U n i t e d S t a t e s , C i v . A
. N o . 0 1
- 3 5 0 3 ( J B S ) , 2 0 0 5 WL 23772963, at*11- 12 ( D
. N
. J
. Sept
. 26, 2005)
. “W ai ver s o f the G o vernm ent ’ s s over ei gn im m u n ity , to b e e f

f e c tiv e , m u st b e u n e q u iv o c a llye x p re ss e d .” U n ited S tate s v . N o rd ic V ill a g e , In c ., 5 0 3 U .S . 3 0 , 3 3 (1 9 9 2 ) (i n ter n a l q u o tatio n s o m itt e d ). S u c h w a iv e rs a re stric tly
c o n s tr u e d in f

a v o r o f th e s o v e re ig n . Id . a t 3 4 (c ita tio n o m itte d ). T he O r di l l es cont end t hatt he D i s t r i ctC our terr ed bec aus e Sect i on 741 i s noti nt ended t o b e a d i s t i n c twai v e ro f s o v e r e i g n i mmun i t y , b u tme r e l ya n a me n d me n tt o t h e t wo- y ear sta tu te o f lim itatio n s p ro v id e d b yth e E C O A , w h ich sta tu te itse lf w a iv e d so v e re ig n im m u n ity fors ui t s al l egi ng di s cr i m i nat i on i n ext ens i ons of cr edi tbyt he G overnm ent . T he O rdil l es
ar gue thatt he el i gi bi l i t y r equi r ement s of Sect i on 741 m ay t hus be w ai ved byt he G overnm ent b e c a u se , o n c e th e G o v e rn m e n t h a s w a iv e d its so v e re ig n im m u n ity , the re is a re b u ttab le pr es um pt i on t hatt he l i m i t at i ons pr i nci pl es appl i cabl e i n s ui t s agai ns t pr i vat e par t i es , s uch as
w ai verand equi t abl e t ol l i ng, appl yt o s ui t s agai ns t t he G overnm ent . See I r w i n v. D ep’ tof V et er ans A ffa i r s , 498 U
. S. 89, 95- 96 ( 1990) ( r ecogni zi ng t hatonce Co n g ress h as w ai ved
s over ei gn i m m uni ty , “maki ng t he rul e of e qui t abl e t ol l i ng ap pl i cabl e t o s ui t s agai ns tt he G o v e r n m e n t , i n t h e s a m e w a y t h a ti ti s a p p l i c a b l e t o p r i v a t e s u i t s , a m o u n t s t o l i t t l e , i f a n y, br oadeni ng of t he congr es s i onal w ai ver ” and hol di ng t hat “the s ame r ebut t abl e pr es um pt i on
o f e q u itab le to lli n g a p p lica b le to su its a g a in st p riv a te d e f e n d a n ts s h o u ld a lso a p p lyto su its12

agai ns t t he U ni t ed St at es ”) ; s ee al s o Scarbor ough v. Pr i nci pi , 541 U
. S
. 4 0 1 , 4 2 1 (2004) ( r ej ect i ng t he G overnm ent ’ s ar gum entt hatthe w ai verof s over ei gn i m m uni t yfr om t he p a y m e n t o f

c o u n se l f

e e s to p re v a ili n g p a rties p u rsu a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 4 1 2 m u st b e stric tly
con strued t o prevent t he r el at i on back of an am end m ent t o a fee pet i t i o n b e c a use

“‘ l i m i t at i ons pr i nci pl es s houl d gener al l yappl yt o t he G overnm ent i n t he same w ay t hatt hey appl yt o pr i vat e part i es ’ ” ( quo ti n g F ran coni a A s s oc. v. U ni t ed St at es , 536 U
. S. 129, 145 (2 0 0 2 )) ). A cc o rdin g ly , th e is s u e b ef o re u s is w h ethe r t h e re q u ir em en ts of S ec ti o n 7 4 1 are subject t o t he rebu t t able pr esum pti on t hat the li m i t at i on s pri ncipl es appli cable t o suit s agai nst p riv a te p a rties sh o u ld b e a p p lied to su its a g a in st th e G o v e rn m e n t, o r w h e th e r th e e lig ib ili ty
r equi r ement s of Sect i on 741 cr eat e a j ur i s di ct i onal pr er equi s i t e t o s ui t . See H edges v. U ni t ed St at es , 404 F. 3d 744, 747 ( 3d C i r . 2005 ) ( ci t i ng M i l l erv. N ew J er s eySt at e D ep’ t . of C o r r e c t i o n s , 1 4 5 F. 3 d 6 1 6 , 6 1 7
- 1 8 ( 3 d Ci r . 1 9 9 8 ) ; Os h i v e r v . Le v i n , Fi s h b e i n, Sedr an & B er m an, 38 F. 3d 1380, 1387 ( 3d C i r . 1994) ; and R obi ns on v. D al t on, 107 F. 3d 1018, 1021 ( 3d C i r . 1997) )
. T hi s C ourthas pr evi ous l yexpl ai ned thatt he fol l ow i ng fac t or s s houl d be
u se d in d e ter m in in g w h e th e r th e Irw in p re su m p tio n h a s b e e n re b u tted : “1 ) w h e th e r e q u ityis al r eadyi ncorpor at ed i nt o t he s t atut e; 2) t he l ength of t he l i m i t at i ons per i od; 3) t he s ubs t ant i ve
ar ea of l aw ; 4) th e stat u tor yl anguage of t he l i m i t at i ons per i od; 5) t he ava i l abi l i t yof ot her exp l i ci texcep t i on s; and 6) t he p otent i al adm i nis t rat i ve b urden o f equ i t able t oll i ng . ” H edg es, 404 F. 3d at 748 ( ci t i ng U ni t ed St at es v. B egger l y , 524 U
. S. 38, 48- 49 ( 1998) an d U n it ed13

S ta te s v . B ro c k a m p , 5 1 9 U .S . 3 4 7 , 3 4 9 -5 4 (1 9 9 7 ))
. I n cons i der i ng t he fi r s t fac t or , w hether equi t y i s al r eady i ncorpor at ed i nt o t he s t atut e, th e c o u rt lo o k s a t w h e th e r C o n g re ss “ p re -e m p ted e q u itab le to lli n g b y in c o rp o ra tin g e q u itab le
cons i der at i ons ” i nt o t he l i m i t at i ons per i od. H edges , 404 F. 3d at748- 49 ( ci t i ng B egger l y , 524 U
. S. at 48- 49) ; s ee al s o B egger l y , 524 U
. S. at48- 49 ( not i ng t hatthe tw el ve- y ears t atut e of l i m i t at i ons pr ovi ded by t he Q ui et T i t l e A ct , w hi ch bega n t o run w hen the pl ai nt i ff kne w or sh o u ld h av e k n o w n o f the claim o f th e U n it ed S tat es, i n co rpo rated eq u it ab le co n side rati o n s). T h e leg isla tiv e h isto ry o f S e c tio n 7 4 1 m a k e s it c lea r th a t th e sta tu te in c o rp o ra tes e q u itab le pr i n c i p l e s , a s i t i s , i n e s s e n c e , a n e q u i t a b l e t o l l i n g o f t h e s t a tu t e o f l i mi t a t i o n s p r ovi ded by t h e ECOA f

o rc e r t a i n e l i g i b l e c a s e s b r o u g h tb e f o r e t h e USDA i n o r d e r t o r e d r e s s p r o b l e ms
w i t h t he U SD A ’ s handl i ng of t hes e ca s es i n t he 1982 t o 1996 t i m e per i od. See G ar ci a, 444 F
. 3d at62 9 n
. 4 (ci t i ng P ub
. L . N o. 10 5-277 , T i t l e V II § 7 41 , 11 2 S t at . 26 81 ); see al so P ig f o rd , 2 0 6 F .3 d a t 1 2 1 5 ; a n d 6 3 F .R . 6 7 3 9 2 (c o d if ie d a t 7 C .F .R . P a rt 1 5 f ). T he s econd f

act orcl ear l yfavor s a fi ndi ng t hat t he el i gi bi l i t y r equi r ement s of Sect i on 741 cr eat e a j ur i s di ct i onal m andat e, s i nce Sec t i on 741 ext ends t he l i m i t at i ons period for el i gi bl e comp lai nt s fr om t w o y ear s t o as m anyas ni net een y ear s ( foran el i gi bl e compl ai nt fil ed b yO ctob er 2 1 , 2 0 0 0 b ase d u p o n d iscri m ination o cc u rri n g as e arlyas Ja n u ary1 , 1 9 8 1 ). See Pub. L
. 105- 277, T i t l e V I I § 741, 112 St at . 2681- 30; s ee al s o B egger l y , 524 U
. S. at48 ( fi ndi ng t hatext ens i on of t he s t atut e of l i m i t at i ons byequi t abl e t ol l i ng w oul d be unw arr ant ed
w h ere the s tatu te i n co rpo rated eq u it ab le princ iples an d h ad a tw elve -y ea r l im it ati o n s p eriod );14

and H edges 404 F. 3d at749 ( “The pr es um pt i on favor i ng equi t abl e t ol l i ng i s s t r ongerw hen t he li m i t at i on s peri od i s sho rt . ” (ci t i ng B egg erl y , 52 4 U
. S
. at 48 and H ug hes v. U nit ed S t at es, 263 F. 3d 272, 278 ( 3d C i r . 2001) )
. I n cons i der i ng t he thi r d fac t or, the s ubs t ant i ve ar ea of law , w e consi derw hethers ui t s m aybe br oughtundert he s t atut e aga i ns tpr i vat e part i es or onl yagai ns tt he G overnm ent . H edges , 404 F. 3d at749. T hi s fac t oral s o favor s a fi ndi ng t hat t he el i gi bi l i t yr equi r ement s of Sect i on 741 m aynotbe w ai ved, s i nce Sec t i on 741 i s a uni que
s t atut e, appl y i ng onl yt o cert ai n s ui t s br oughtagai ns tt he G overnm entpur s uantt o t he Equal C r edi t O ppor tuni t y A ct . W e al s o fi nd t hat t he r emai ni ng fac t or s di s favort he appl i cat i on of t he li m i t at i on s pri ncipl es avai l able t o p ri vate part i es ag a instt he U nit ed S t at es becau se S ect i on 74 1 is a un i qu e st atute that on l y w ai ves the st atute of li m i t at i on s for a l i m i t ed clas s of compl ai nt s t hatw er e i ni t i al l ybr oughtadmi ni s t r at i vel yagai ns tt he U SD A dur i ng a l i m i t ed t i me p e r i o d a n d t h a t , b e c a u s e o f a d mi n i s t r a t i v e p r o b l e ms wi th i n t h e USDA d u r i n g t h a tt i me p eriod , w ere o therw ise l o st be ca u se th e statute of li m it ati o n s ex p ir ed o n tho se c lai m s b ef o re th e U S D A h a d m a d e a n a d m in is tr a tiv e d e te rm in a tio n . W e fi nd, t her efor e, t hatt he I r w i n pr es um pt i on t hat the l i m i t at i ons pr i nci pl es
a p p lica b le to p riv a te p a rties m a y b e a p p lied a g a in st th e G o v e rn m e n t h a s b e e n re b u tted in th is
c a se , an d th a t th e e lig ib ili ty re q u ire m e n ts o f S e c tio n 7 4 1 c re a te a ju risd ictio n a l p re re q u isite t o t he w ai verof s over ei gn i m m uni t y cont ai ned i n t he E C O A t hat m us t be s t r i ct l ycons t rued in f a v o r o f th e G o v e rn m e n t. S e e N o rd ic V ill a g e , 5 0 3 U .S . at 3 3 . T h e U S D A c o u ld n o t, t her efor e, have w ai ved t he r equi r ement of Sect i on 741( e) t hat , t o be el i gi bl e fora w ai verof15

t he EC O A s t at u te o f l i m i t at i ons , t he O r di l l es ’ di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai ntm us thave be en admi ni s t r at i vel yfi l ed w i t h t he U SD A pr i ort o J ul y 1, 1997. T he form l et t er s s entbyR honda D avi s t o t he O r di l l es on Sept ember 17 and D ece m ber 6 , 1999, and the O ct ober28, 1999 d e c isio n o f

R o sa lin d G ra y , a lth o u g h c o n f o u n d in g to th e O rd ill e s, c o u ld n o t w a iv e th e e lig ib le
co m p lai n t r eq u ir em en ts of S ec ti o n 7 4 1 (e). C o n seq u en tl y , w e f ind that the O rdil les’ Jan u ary 1, 1998 di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai ntw as notan el i gi bl e compl ai ntpur s uantt o Sect i on 741( e) and t hat i tw as, accordingl y , t i m e-bar red byt he E C O A ’s t w o-y ear s t atute of l i m i t at i on s. C
. T he J anuary1997 C om pl ai nt T he O r di l l es al s o cont end, i n t he al t ernat i ve, t hat t hei r cl ai m s houl d notbe t i m e- bar r ed beca us e thei rJ anuary1997 compl ai ntw as an el i gi bl e compl ai ntpur s uantt o Sect i on 741. T he O r di l l es ’ J anuary 1997 compl ai nt w as fi l ed w i t hi n t he al l ow abl e Sect i on 741 t i m e fr ame. It a ss e rts th a t th e F S A c o m m itt e d e th ica l lap se s w ith re sp e c t to th e O rd ill e s’ lo a n , fa iled to
c o m m u n ica te w ith th e m a b o u t lo a n p ro g ra m s, m a d e m ista k e s w ith re sp e c t to th e in ter e st ra te on t he l oan, and i m pr oper l yr efus ed t o as s i s tt he O r di l l es i n convey i ng t hei r farm t o anot her f a rm e r, o r to a c c e p t c o n v e y a n c e o f th e f a rm to th e F S A in sa tisf a c tio n o f th e O rd ill e s’ d e b t. T he J anuary1997 compl ai nt does nots peci fi cal l yas s er t , oreven hi nt , t hatt he FSA ’ s act i ons
w er e mot i vat ed byi l l egal di s cr i m i nat i on. Pur s uantt o Sect ion 7 41, an el i gi bl e compl ai nt
m us tal l ege di s cr i m i nat i on dur i ng t he per i od “b eg inn i ng on J anuary1, 1981 and endi ng D ece m ber 31, 1996
- ( 1) i n vi ol at i on of t he Equal C r edi tO ppor tuni t yA ct( 15 U
. S. C
. 1691 ets eq. )
. ” Pub. L
. 105- 277, T i t l e V I I § 741( e), 1 1 2 S tat . 2 6 81- 31. T he J anuary199716

compl ai nt does not al l ege di s cr i m i nat i on i n vi ol at i on of t he E C O A and, t her efor e, i s notan
e lig ib le c o m p lain t. D
. R el at i on B ack T he O r di l l es al s o as k t he C our t t o vi ew t hei r J anuary 1, 1998 di s cr i m i nat i on compl ai nt
as per fec t i ng, or amendi ng, t hei r J anuary 1997 compl ai nt . T heyas s er tt hatt hei rJ anuary1, 1 9 9 8 c o m p lain t is a n a m e n d m e n t o f th e ir Ja n u a ry 1 9 9 7 c o m p lain t an d , thu s, re late s b a c k to th e f ili n g o f th e Ja n u a ry 1 9 9 7 c o m p lain t a n d is, th e re f o re , a n e lig ib le c o m p lain t p u rsu a n t to S e c tio n 7 4 1 (e ). T h e O rd ill e s h a v e n o t, ho w e v e r, su b m itt e d a n ya u th o ritysu p p o rtin g th e ir
c o n te n tio n . T he O r di l l es cont end thatD r . W u’ s O ct ober 1997 l et t erw as an ac know l edgment of th e ir Ja n u a ry1 9 9 7 c o m p lain t an d a re q u e st th a t th e ysu p p lem e n t th a t co m p lain t w ith add i t i on al al l egati on s w hich set fo rth t heir speci fi c cl ai m s o f dis cri m i nati on . T he O rdi l l es’ cont ent i on i s nots uppor t ed byt he evi dence of r ecor d. T he O r di l l es ’ J anuary1997 compl ai nt
w as r ej ect ed byt he U SD A on February 20, 1997 and ther e i s no evi dence t hatt he O r di l l es
s oughtany r evi ew of t hat deci s i on. D r . W u’ s O ct ober1997 l et t erdoes notas k t he O r di l l es t o s uppl ement t hei rJ anuary1997 compl ai ntbys peci fi cal l ys t at i ng t hei rcl ai m s of di s cr i m i nat i on, butdoes s t at e:

T he Pr ogr am Inve s t i gat i on D i vi s i on ( PI D ) i s r es pon s i bl e for p r o c e s s i n g d i s c r i mi n a t i o n c o mpl a i n t s b yp a r t i c i p a n t s f o r[ s i c] U S D A ’s fede ral f

in a ncial l yassi st ed o r condu ct ed p rogram s. PI D has s ear ched thei rr ecor ds and theydo nots how anyact i ve compl ai ntfr om y ou.17 T o reg ist er y o u r co m p lai n t, p lease co m p let e th e e n clos ed fo rm and r etur n i t t o m y offi ce w i t hi n 20 day s of r ece i ptof t hi s l et t er i n t h e e n c l o s e d e n v e l o p e . Cl e a r l yi n d i c a t e y o u rl e g al r epr es ent at i ve, i f y ou have one
. I f w e do nothearfr om y ou w i t hi n 20 day s , w e w i l l as s um e that y o u d o n o t w ish to p u rsu e a c o m p lain t a n d c lo se o u r file s o n th is m att er. A p p . at A 5 5 . T h e Ja n u a ry1 , 1 9 9 8 c o m p lain t, w h ich w a s f iled sig n if

ica n tlym o re th a n tw e n ty day s l at er , does not purpor t t o amend or add cl ai m s t o t he J anuary1997 compl ai nt . I ndeed, th e Ja n u a ry1 , 1 9 9 8 c o m p lain t d o e s n o t ev e n m e n tio n th e e x iste n c e o f a n e a rlier c o m p lain t. U ndert hes e ci r cumst ance s , w e can n otvi ew t he J anuary1998 compl ai ntas an amendm ent
o f t h e J a n u a r y1 9 9 7 c o mp l a i n tt h a twa s r e q u e s t e d b yt h e US DA. E v e n if th e Ja n u a ry1 , 1 9 9 8 c o m p lain t w a s in ten d e d b y th e O rd ill e s a s a n a m e n d m e n t,
o r p erf ec ti o n , o f t h e Jan u ary 1 9 9 7 co m p lai n t, there is n o au tho ri ty w h ich w o u ld su p p o rt
r el at i on back of the l at t ercompl ai ntt o t he dat e of f i l i ng of t he ea r l i ercompl ai nt . T he pu rpose of S ect i on 74 1 i s t o r evive cert ai n pre- exis t i ng com plai nts w hich w ou l d o t herw i se be t i m e- bar r ed. T he r egul at i ons w hi ch i m pl ement t he adj udi cat i on p r o c e s s f o rd i s c r i mi n a t i on compl ai nt s fi l ed adm i ni s t r at i vel y w i t hi n t he U SD A pur s uant t o Sect i on 741 do notpr ovi de fo r t h e a m en d m en t or relati o n b ac k o f am en d m en ts to th o se co m p lai n ts. S ee 7 C
. F
. R
. P art 15f. T o t he contr ary , t he i m pl ement i ng r egul at i ons cont empl at e cons i der at i on onl yof t he pr e- exi s t i ng compl ai nt . See 63 F. R
. 67393 ( s t at i ng t hat “pr ocee di ngs undert hes e r egul at i ons
w i l l be att he r eques tof, orw i t h t he cons entof, t he compl ai nantt o cons i derhi s orherpr eexi s t i ng compl ai ntundert hes e pr ocedur es ”) ( codi fi ed at 7 C
. F. R
. Par t15f)
. A s t her e i s noT h e O rd ill e s d o n o t co n ten d th a t F e d e ra l R u le o f C iv il P ro c e d u re 1 5 (c ) a p p lies to 2 admi ni s t r at i ve cl ai m s br oughtbefor e the U SD A pur s uantt o Sect i on 741 and w e have found no author i t yfors uch appl i cat i on. 18 s t atut e orr egul at i on t hatpr ovi des fort he r el at i on back of amendm ent s t o compl ai nt s m ade pur s uantt o Sect i on 741, w e l ook t o t he doct r i ne of r el at i on back a s i texi s t s i n t he comm on l aw . U nder the comm on l aw , r el at i on back of amendm ent s i s notper m i t t ed w hen t he 2
am en d m en t al ters t h e ca u se o f ac ti o n . S ee 6 C h arles A lan W ri g h t, A rt h u r R
. M il ler & M ary K ayK an e, F ed er al Pr act i ce a nd Pr ocedur e § 1471 ( 2d ed. 1990)
. Si nce the J anuary1997 compl ai ntdi d notas s er ta cl ai m for di s cr i m i nat i on i n vi ol at i on of t he EC O A , w e conc l ude that the Janua r y1998 compl ai ntdoes notr el at e bac k t o t he fi l i ng of t he J anuary1997
co m p lai n t and is, there fo re, no t an e li g ible co m p lai n t pu rsua n t t o S ec ti o n 7 4 1 (e). I V. F o r th e f o re g o in g re a so n s, w e w ill a f f irm th e d e c isio n o f

th e D istric t C o u rt in a ll
res pects .