Employment Litigation · Primary-source case analysis

Mach Mining: Courts May Review Whether the EEOC Attempted Conciliation

By Aneeta Mishra and Timothy Chan

Published May 4, 2026

Mach Mining defines the judicial role in enforcing Title VII's requirement that the EEOC attempt conciliation before filing an enforcement action.

The employer challenged the pre-suit effort

After finding reasonable cause on a sex-discrimination charge, the EEOC sent letters initiating and later ending conciliation, then sued. Mach Mining argued that the agency had not conciliated in good faith; the EEOC contended its efforts were unreviewable.

The statutory duty is reviewable

Congress imposed a mandatory obligation to endeavor to resolve the alleged practice through informal conference, conciliation, and persuasion. The ordinary presumption of judicial review therefore applied, even though the agency retained substantial discretion.

Review is limited to notice and opportunity

The EEOC must inform the employer of the specific allegation, including what the employer allegedly did and which person or class was affected, and must try to engage the employer in discussion. Courts may verify those minimum steps but may not grade negotiation strategy or impose a detailed good-faith code.

The remedy is renewed conciliation

An EEOC affidavit will ordinarily establish compliance; concrete contrary evidence may justify limited factfinding. If the agency failed, the court should order the required conciliation opportunity rather than dismiss the underlying discrimination claim outright.

Key takeaways

• Confirm the notice identifies the practice and affected group.
• Preserve concrete evidence if no discussion opportunity occurred.
• Do not demand judicial review of bargaining tactics or settlement positions.
• Expect a stay and renewed conciliation as the ordinary remedy.