Order Following Prehearing Conference

BEFORE THE

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Consolidated Matters of:

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT, OAH Case No. 2014120050 v.

HACIENDA LA PUENTE UNIFIED

SCHOOL DISTRICT,

HACIENDA LA PUENTE UNIFIED OAH Case No. 2015030389

SCHOOL DISTRICT,

v.

ORDER FOLLOWING PREHEARING

PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT. CONFERENCE

On April 6, 2015, a telephonic prehearing conference was held before Administrative Law Judge Clifford H. Woosley, Office of Administrative Hearings. Attorney Surisa Rivers appeared on behalf of Student. Attorneys Ricardo Silva and Karin M. Anderson appeared on behalf of Hacienda La Puente Unified School District. The PHC was recorded.

Based on discussion of the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:

1. Hearing Dates, Times, and Location. The hearing shall take place on April 14,

2015, and May 5, 6, and 12, 2015, beginning at 9:00 a.m., except for April 14 and May 5, 2015, which will begin at 9:30 a.m., and continuing day to day, Monday through Thursday, as needed at the discretion of the Administrative Law Judge.

The hearing shall take place at District’s offices, located at 15151 Palm Avenue, Hacienda Heights, California 91745.

District shall provide a facility for the hearing that fully complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.), the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. § 794.), the Unruh Civil Rights Act (Civ. Code, § 51 et seq.), and all laws governing accessibility of government facilities to persons with disabilities.

The parties shall immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates, and shall subpoena witnesses if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will be available to testify.

A witness will not be regarded as unavailable for purposes of showing “good cause” to continue the hearing if the witness is not properly notified of the hearing date or properly subpoenaed, as applicable.

2. Issues. The issues at the due process hearing on Student’s complaint are:

(1) Did District fail to meet its child find obligation between November 2012 and October 2013 and, if so, did such failure deny Student a free appropriate public education? (2) Within two years before the filing of this due process complaint, did District deny Student a free appropriate public education by not finding Student eligible for special education placement and services? The issues at the due process hearing on District’s complaint are:

(1) Was District’s speech-language assessment, which was included within the October 31, 2014 Multidisciplinary Supplemental Report, appropriate such that Student is not entitled to an independent educational evaluation in the area of speech-language at District’s expense? (2) Was District’s occupational therapy assessment, dated September 30, 2014 and reviewed at the October 31, 2014 individualized education program team meeting, appropriate such that Student is not entitled to an independent educational evaluation in the area of occupational therapy at District’s expense?

3. Exhibits. Exhibits shall be pre-marked and placed in three-ring exhibit binders

prior to the hearing. The parties shall use numbers to identify exhibits, but shall place the letter “S” or “D” in front of the exhibit to designate if it is a Student or District exhibit (for example, “S-5, S-6, or D-1, D-2”). Each exhibit shall be internally paginated by exhibit, or all of a party’s exhibits shall be Bates-stamped. Each exhibit binder shall contain a detailed table of contents. At the hearing, each party shall supply an exhibit binder containing its exhibits for use by the ALJ, and a second exhibit binder for use by witnesses. The parties are to serve their evidence binders on each other by April 7, 2015, to comply with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). (See Paragraph 7, below.) The parties may not serve exhibits on OAH prior to the hearing. In the event of duplicate exhibits, the most legible version will be used.

Student shall serve two copies of his evidence binder upon District’s counsel. (See Paragraph 6, Telephonic Testimony, below.)

If a party intends to rely upon a witness’s education and professional experience in presenting testimony, the party must include the curriculum vitae of each such witness as part of the party’s exhibits.

Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not included in the exhibit lists and not previously timely exchanged shall not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless it is supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and the ALJ rules that it is admissible.

4. Witnesses. Each party is responsible for procuring the attendance at hearing

of its own witnesses. Each party shall make witnesses under its control reasonably available. The parties shall schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order. Neither party shall be permitted to call any witnesses not disclosed in the party’s prehearing conference statement except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.

The parties are ordered to meet and confer by April 10, 2015, for purposes of preparing a schedule of witnesses to be presented to the ALJ on the first day of hearing. The parties are encouraged to review and shorten their witness lists prior to the hearing, bearing in mind that evidence will be excluded if it is repetitive, cumulative, or insufficiently probative to justify the time it would take to hear. The parties shall be prepared at the end of each day of hearing to discuss the witnesses to be presented the next day and the time the testimony of each such witness is expected to take. The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses who testify and the time allowed for witnesses’ testimony.

5. Scope of Witness Examination. After the first direct and cross-examinations,

each party shall be limited in examining the witness to only those matters raised in the immediately preceding examination. If a witness is to be called by more than one party, the parties need be prepared to examine the witness when first called. Except on a motion and good cause shown, a witness will appear and testify once.

6. Telephonic Testimony. Whether a witness may appear by telephone is a

matter within the discretion of the ALJ. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) Any party seeking to present a witness by telephone shall move in advance for leave to do so, unless the opposing party has stipulated that the witness may appear by telephone. The proponent of the witness shall provide the proposed witness with a complete set of exhibit binders from all parties, containing all of each party’s exhibits, prior to the hearing; and shall ensure that the hearing room has sound equipment that allows everyone in the room to hear the witness, and the witness to hear objections and rulings. No witness will be heard by telephone unless all these requirements have been fulfilled.

District’s motion to allow witness Adlina Minassi-Duggan to testify telephonically is granted. Equitably considering that the parties jointly sought continuance, which fortuitously resulted in Ms. Duggan being unavailable for personal testimony (see prior March 23, 2015 order), Student shall serve two copies of Student’s evidence binder upon District’s counsel.

District shall then provide Ms. Duggan with a complete exhibit binder from each party, containing all of each party’s exhibits, prior to the hearing, and shall ensure that the hearing room has sound equipment that allows everyone in the room to hear the witness.

7. Timely Disclosure of Witnesses/Exhibits. Education Code section 56505,

subdivision (e)(7), provides for disclosure of witnesses and exhibits “at least” five business days prior to the hearing, which is April 7, 2015.

8. Order of Presentation of Evidence. Student is a petitioner, bears the burden of

proof as to claims made in his complaint, and will first present evidence as to his issues, to be followed by District’s presentation of evidence. District is a petitioner that bears the burden of proof as to claims made in its complaint. As noted in Paragraph 5, District shall be prepared to examine a witness, in response to Student’s complaint and in support of its complaint, when a witness first testifies, no matter which party calls the witness.

9. Motions. Other than District’s motion for telephonic testimony, which was

discussed and ruled upon in Paragraph 6, no pretrial motions are pending. Any motion filed after this date, including motions for any further continuances, shall be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing good cause as to why the motion was not made prior to or during the prehearing conference of April 6, 2015.

Note that District previously made motions to limit issues at the prehearing conference on Student’s complaint, before consolidation of these matters. ALJ Woosley ruled upon the motions, as reflected in the March 9, 2015 order following prehearing conference.

10. Stipulations. Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions or resolutions are

encouraged. Any proposed stipulation shall be submitted to the assigned ALJ in written form.

11. Conduct of Counsel and Hearing Room Decorum. Counsel, all parties, and all

witnesses shall conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times.

Cellular phones, pagers, recorders, and other noisemaking electronic devices shall be shut off or set to vibrate during the hearing unless permission to the contrary is obtained from the

ALJ.

12. Compensatory Education/Reimbursement. Any party seeking reimbursement

of expenditures shall present admissible evidence of these expenditures, or a stipulation to the amount of expenditures, as part of its case in chief. A party seeking compensatory education should provide evidence regarding the type, amount, duration, and need for any requested compensatory education.

13. Special Needs and Accommodations. At present neither party anticipates the

need for special accommodation for any witness or party, or for translation services.

A party or participant to this case, such as a witness, requiring reasonable accommodation to participate in the hearing may contact the assigned calendar clerk at (916) 263-0880, the OAH ADA Coordinator at OAHADA@dgs.ca.gov or 916-263-0880, as soon as the need is made known. Additional information concerning requests for reasonable accommodation is available on OAH’s website at http://www.dgs.ca.gov/oah/Home/ Accommodations.aspx.

14. Hearing Closed To the Public. The hearing is closed to the public.

15. Settlement. The parties are encouraged to continue working together to reach

an agreement before the due process hearing. The parties shall inform OAH in writing immediately should they reach a settlement or otherwise resolve the dispute before the scheduled hearing. In addition, if a settlement is reached within five days of the scheduled start of the due process hearing, the parties shall also inform OAH of the settlement by telephone at (916) 263-0880.

IF A FULL AND FINAL WRITTEN SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS REACHED

AFTER 5:00 P.M. THE DAY PRIOR TO HEARING, THE PARTIES SHALL LEAVE A

VOICEMAIL MESSAGE REGARDING THE SETTLEMENT AT (916) 274-6035. THE

PARTIES SHOULD ALSO LEAVE CONTACT INFORMATION SUCH AS CELLULAR

PHONE NUMBERS OF EACH PARTY OR COUNSEL FOR EACH PARTY. THE

PARTIES SHOULD SIMULTANEOUSLY FAX THE SIGNATURE PAGE OF THE

SIGNED AGREEMENT OR A LETTER WITHDRAWING THE CASE TO THE OAH AT

THE FAXINATION LINE at 916-376-6319.

Dates for hearing will not be cancelled until the letter of withdrawal or signature page of the signed agreement has been received by OAH. If an agreement in principle is reached, the parties should plan to attend the scheduled hearing unless different arrangements have been agreed upon by the assigned ALJ. The assigned ALJ will check for messages the evening prior to the hearing or the morning of the hearing.

16. Failure to comply with this order may result in the exclusion of evidence or

other sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATE: April 7, 2015

/ S/

CLIFFORD H. WOOSLEY

Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings