correctly states the law on the relationship between the statute of limitations and requests for reconsideration. It is well-settled that “[m]ere requests to reconsider ... cannot extend the limitations periods applicable to the civil rights laws.” Delaware State College v. Ricks, 449 U.S. 250, 261 n. 15, 101 S.Ct. 498, 66 L.Ed.2d 431 (1980); see Soignier, 92 F.3d at 553 (“Rather than an independent wrong, the denial of [an internal] appeal merely confirmed the Board’s earlier decisions,” and thus did not affect the accrual date); Martin v. Southwestern Virginia Gas Co., 135 F.3d 307, 310 (4th Cir.1998) (“An employer’s refusal to undo a discriminatory decision is not a fresh act of discrimination.”) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted); Stewart, 2006 WL 626921, at *6 (<HOLDING>). Thus, the instruction correctly states that:
holding that duress toll to statute of limitations under state law had no application to federal rico statute of limitations holding that the aedpa statute of limitations is not jurisdictional holding statute that extended statute of limitations for certain criminal sexual conduct could not be applied retroactively to a prosecution commenced after the limitations statute in effect at the time of the alleged offense had expired holding that a plaintiff cannot restart the statute of limitations by rerequesting the denied accommodation holding that trial court erred by granting a directed verdict on statute of limitations defense and remanding for a new trial on the statute of limitations only