California OAH special education order · August 15, 2013
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2013071304 · ALJ Peter Paul Castillo
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, rejecting the District's claim that dates were unclear, because the complaint identified the specific assessment period, IEE request dates, and April 1, 2013 IEP at issue.
This case went to decision
Student v. Newport-Mesa Unified School District (consolidated): Newport-Mesa Unified's triennial assessment and special day class IEP offer upheld; district may implement IEP without parental consent. (2014)
Summary
The District filed a Notice of Insufficiency arguing that Student's five issues were inadequately pled because the dates of the alleged FAPE denials were unclear. OAH disagreed. The complaint identified the November 2012 through January 2013 assessment, the dates Parent requested an IEE, and the April 1, 2013 IEP as the basis for the remaining issues. Student's proposed resolutions, an IEE at District expense and an IEP offering FAPE in the least restrictive environment, were well defined, so all scheduled dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A complaint that ties each issue to a specific assessment, request date, or IEP gives the district enough notice to survive an insufficiency challenge. If a parent later wants to raise other time periods, they must file a motion to amend the complaint.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Ed. Code § 56502
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
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:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH CASE NO. 2013071304
v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
NEWPORT-MESA UNIFIED SCHOOL COMPLAINT
DISTRICT.
On July 30, 2013, Parent on behalf of Student (Student) filed a Due Process Hearing Request 1 (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) naming the Newport-Mesa Unified School District (District). On August 13, 2013, the District filed a Notice of Insufficiency (NOI) as to Student’s complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. 2 The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
A complaint is sufficient if it contains: (1) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to the proposed initiation or change concerning the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) to the child; (2) facts relating to the problem; and (3) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. 3 These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the 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).
2 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).
3 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).
named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. 4 The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” 5 The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. 6 Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. 7
DISCUSSION
Student’s complaint contains five issues for hearing, 8 which allege that the District failed to assess Student in all areas of suspected disabilities, failed to provide an individual educational evaluation (IEE) and made an individualized educational program (IEP) offer that did not meet his unique needs in the least restrictive environment (LRE). The District’s NOI contends that the five issues are not adequately pled because the dates in which the District purportedly denied Student a FAPE are unclear.
As to Issue 1, the complaint is clear that the assessment in question is the one conducted in November 2012 through January 2013. For Issue 2, the complaint sets forth the dates when Parent requested the IEE. Finally as to Issues 3, 4, and 5, the IEP at issue is the April 1, 2013 IEP. 9 Accordingly, Student alleges sufficient facts supporting these claims in his complaint to put the District on notice, and therefore the complaint is sufficiently pled.
4 See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.
5 Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.
6 Alexandra R. v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, No. 06-cv-0215-JL)
2009 WL 2957991 at p.3 [nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F. Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd.
(M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, No. 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 at p. 3[nonpub.
opn.] ; but cf. M.S.-G. v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.
772, at p. 3[nonpub. opn.].
7 Assistance to States for the Education of Children With Disabilities and Preschool Grants for Children With Disabilities, 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541, 46699 (Aug. 14, 2006).
8 Student acknowledges that Issue 6 is outside the scope of OAH’s jurisdiction.
9 If Student contends that there are other periods at issue, Student will need to file a motion to amend the complaint to allege clearly the other periods.
Student’s proposed resolutions are that the District pay for an IEE and develop an IEP that provides Student with a FAPE in the LRE. A complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C. §1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) The proposed resolutions stated in Student’s complaint are well-defined requests that meet the statutorily required standard of stating a resolution to the extent known and available to Student at the time.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
Dated: August 15, 2013 /s/
PETER PAUL CASTILLO
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings