Ask FELTG: Is a complainant’s failure to cooperate a legitimate reason to dismiss an EEO complaint?

January 13, 2026

Thanks for the question. As you likely know, the Federal sector EEO process is time-consuming and convoluted. When a party doesn’t follow the rules – including failing to adhere to requests for information, or to meet deadlines – the case could be dismissed for failure to cooperate:

 

[T]he agency shall dismiss an entire complaint… Where the agency has provided the complainant with a written request to provide relevant information or otherwise proceed with the complaint, and the complainant has failed to respond to the request within 15 days of its receipt or the complainant’s response does not address the agency’s request, provided that the request included a notice of the proposed dismissal.

29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(7).

But, not every failure to reply is evidence of failure to cooperate. Consider the following two cases.

Case Example 1: Casie S. v. VA, EEOC App. No. 2023003516 (Oct. 31, 2023)

The complainant, a Nurse Educator, filed a formal complaint alleging discrimination on the bases of race, age, and reprisal. The agency dismissed the complaint because, while it was timely received, it was not signed with a wet or digital signature. The complainant’s attorney disputed the agency’s dismissal, asserting he had signed the complaint electronically and was authorized to do so on behalf of his client. Id. at 2.

The EEOC pointed to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(7) and stated such a dismissal should be made by the agency only when there is “a clear record of delay or contumacious conduct” by the complainant, and that while the parties disagreed on whether the attorney’s electronic signature was valid, the attorney had not engaged in contumacious conduct. Id. at 5. Therefore, the EEOC reversed the dismissal.

Case Example 2: Stella K. v. Commerce, EEOC App. No. 2023003570 (Sept. 18, 2023)

The complainant, an applicant, filed a formal complaint alleging discrimination based on race, disability, and age related to a nonselection. A week after she filed, the agency via certified mail sent her a Request for Information, asserting she failed to sufficiently detail the part of the complaint requiring a description of “the action(s) or policy(ies) you believe was (were) discriminatory…(b)e specific and include dates,” and requiring a response within 15 calendar days. Id. at 2. In the same mailing the agency informed the complainant if she failed to timely respond the agency may dismiss her complaint.

A few weeks later the agency issued a final decision dismissing the complaint pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.107(a)(7), because the complainant failed to respond to its Request for Information. The complainant appealed, arguing she never received the mailing and never signed for it. She provided proof she “inquired with the mail carrier/residential building management about the Agency’s package..” and that “…she did not sign for the package and building management misplaced it, telling her it was returned to sender.” Id. at 3. She later learned that the letter was put in an incorrect mailbox, and once she located it she timely replied to the Request for Information.

EEOC sided with the complainant, finding she had sufficient reason for failing to respond, and ordered the agency to provide her with an added opportunity to clarify her claims.

These are just two examples, out of hundreds, and serve as a warning to be sure you are familiar with the regulations – and the cases interpreting the regulations – before your agency improperly dismisses a complaint.

Have a question? Ask FELTG. info@feltg.com

Related training:

This information is for educational purposes only and is not legal advice. Contacting FELTG does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please consult an attorney for legal advice.