I) Does protection against retaliation apply even if the
original complaint or charge was untimely or was
found to lack merit when initiated by the same actor
but different retaliatory conduct ;
Did the Appeals Court ERR , in holding that this
action is timely-barred by its charge of Retaliation
when originally included within the scope of the
Plaintiffs right to file a Federal lawsuit determined
by the charge's content .
II) When an employer has an ONGOING obligation
to provide a reasonable accommodation and
failure to provide such accommodation constitute
a violation each time the employee needs it;
When applying the statute of limitations , when is a
claim timely-barred when there remains a need
for an accommodation that has yet to be provided ;
Must a plaintiff file a second EEOC charge in order
to judicially pursue a timely claim when there is
already NOTICE of an employee 's desire for an
accommodation to remain employed in some
capacity .
III) Did the Appeals Court ERR in dismissing this
Pro Se complaint as timely-barred without allowing
the opportunity to present evidence of a timely
discrete act and an act of retaliation that would
allow proof of a set of facts that would entitle relief
to this claim , when the law requires the Court to
read Petitioners ' pro se complaint , indulgently .
IV) Did the Appeals Court ERR in dismissing this claim
as timely-barred , when a timely charge may also
challenge related incidents that occur after a
charge is filed , as within this complaint .

Does protection against retaliation apply even if the original complaint or charge was untimely or was found to lack merit when initiated by the same actor but different retaliatory conduct