a timely EEOC complaint, other non-filing plaintiffs may join in the action if their individual claims aris[e] out of similar discriminatory treatment in the same time frame.” Snell v. Suffolk County, 782 F.2d 1094, 1100 (2d Cir.1986) (internal quotation marks omitted). In cases such as this, when the allegedly discriminatory activity affects a large group, piggybacking is not allowed unless the filed charge provides “some indication that the grievance affects a group of individuals defined broadly enough to include those who seek to piggyback on the claim.” Tolliver, 918 F.2d at 1058. An individual who has previously filed an EEOC charge cannot piggyback onto someone else’s EEOC charge. See Levy v. United States Gen. Accounting Office, 175 F.3d 254, 255 (2d Cir.1999) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); see also Snell, 782 F.2d at 1100 (stating
holding premature a suit filed before final administrative determination of claimants administrative claim holding that federal prisoners need not exhaust their administrative remedies before filing suit in federal court holding that the timely filing of an administrative charge of discrimination is a prerequisite to bringing suit holding that individuals who filed administrative charge but failed to file federal suit within 90 days of receipt of righttosue letter as required by the adea could not take advantage of single filing rule holding that 120 days notice was satisfied by 30 days work plus 90 days pay