California OAH special education order · July 16, 2013
Order Denying Request for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2013070150 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH denied Student's request to reconsider an order finding most complaint issues insufficient, because a complaint must be sufficient on its face and an opposition to the insufficiency notice cannot fix it.
Summary
After OAH found 12 issues in Student's due process complaint insufficiently pled, Student asked for reconsideration, arguing that OAH had not reviewed Student's opposition to the District's Notice of Insufficiency. OAH denied the request because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law. OAH explained that sufficiency is judged only within the four corners of the complaint itself, so whether OAH considered the opposition did not matter.
Why it matters
Families cannot cure a vague due process complaint by adding detail in an opposition to a notice of insufficiency; the complaint itself must state the problems and proposed resolutions. The better route is to file an amended complaint within the time OAH allows.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
- Ed. Code, § 56502
Topics
Full text of the order
Published text of the OAH order. Page headers and numbers from the original PDF have been dropped.
BEFORE THE
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
In the Matter of:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013070150
v. ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION
SAN JOSE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
On June 28, 2013, Parents on behalf of Student (Student) filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) naming the San Jose Unified School District (District).
On July 8, 2013, the District filed a Notice of Insufficiency (NOI) as to Student’s complaint.
On July 9, 2013, the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) issued an order finding that Student’s complaint was insufficiently pled as to issues one, two, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 15, and giving Student 14 days to file an amended complaint. On July 12, 2013, Student filed a request for reconsideration.
APPLICABLE LAW
The Office of Administrative Hearings will generally reconsider a ruling upon a showing of new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration, when the party seeks reconsideration within a reasonable period of time. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 11521; Code Civ. Proc., § 1008.) The party seeking reconsideration may also be required to provide an explanation for its failure to previously provide the different facts, circumstances or law. (See Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1199-1200.)
DISCUSSION AND ORDER
Student alleges no new facts, circumstances, or law in support of the request for reconsideration. Rather, Student bases his request for reconsideration solely on his belief 1 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
that OAH failed to review and consider Student’s opposition to the District’s NOI prior to issuing the July 9, 2013 order. Student fails to provide any authority supporting that a party’s complaint for due process hearing may be insufficiently pled so long as it is supplemented by a later pleading.
Student’s argument is not well taken. Student fails to understand that a party’s complaint must meet the requirements set forth in Title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A) on its face. A party’s complaint will not be deemed sufficient when it fails to meet these requirements within the four corners of the complaint itself. Therefore, whether OAH considered Student’s opposition to the District’s NOI is not relevant to OAH’s July 9, 2013 Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint.
Accordingly, Student’s request for reconsideration is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 16, 2013 /s/
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings