California OAH special education order · June 3, 2015
Order Granting Notice of Insufficiency
OAH Case No. 2015050169 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH found Student's amended complaint insufficient for a second time because it repeated already-rejected issues and did not say what District did, when, or how it denied a FAPE.
Summary
District challenged the sufficiency of Student's amended due process complaint. It titled the filing a motion to dismiss, but OAH treated it as a notice of insufficiency. OAH found three of the five issues identical to issues it had already ruled insufficient. The new issues were also too vague: they named no specific District actions or dates and described disjointed facts about a suspension, a phone call, and a teacher's absence without tying them to a denial of FAPE. Student was given 14 days to file a second amended complaint stating eligibility, unique needs, what happened, when, and how it denied a FAPE, or the case would be dismissed.
Why it matters
Re-filing the same issues that OAH already rejected will not fix a complaint. Each claim must name specific district actions, when they happened, and how they denied a FAPE. Parents without lawyers can ask OAH for a mediator to help them frame their issues.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- 71 Fed.Reg. 46540-46541
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. 2015050169 v. ORDER GRANTING NOTICE OF
INSUFFICIENCY
VACAVILLE UNIFIED SCHOOL
DISTRICT.
On April 22, 2015, Parent on behalf of Student filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings a Due Process Hearing Request 1 naming the Vacaville Unified School District. On May 7, 2015, District filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s complaint, which OAH granted on May 12, 2015.
Student timely filed an amended complaint on May 21, 2015. On May 28, 2015, District timely filed a Notice of Insufficiency 2 as to Student’s amended complaint. For the reasons discussed below, the Notice of Insufficiency is granted with leave to amend.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. 3 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).
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 Each of District’s motions were entitled motions to dismiss, but are considered notices of insufficiency because each motion was based upon Student’s failure to sufficiently describe facts and issues.
3 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).
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 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. 4 These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation. 5 The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” 6 The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. 7 Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. 8
DISCUSSION
Student’s amended complaint alleges five issues. Issues One, Two and Three are identical to the issues contained in Student’s original complaint, which were deemed insufficient by OAH on May 12, 2015. Therefore, for the same reasons cited in OAH’s May 12, 2015 Order Granting Notice of Insufficiency, these issues are insufficient to put the District on notice of the issues forming the basis of the amended complaint.
4 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).
5 See, H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.
6 Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.
7 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.].
8 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).
Student’s Issues Four alleges that District failed to accommodate Student’s learning disability. However, Student fails to specify what actions taken by District resulted in the denial of a free and appropriate public education, or when such conduct occurred. Student’s Issue Five describes disjointed facts regarding a five day suspension, a boisterous phone call from a school administrator, and a teacher’s absence, yet fails to identify a specific problem or action by District which resulted in a denial of a FAPE.
Student’s amended complaint fails to identify the issues and adequate related facts about the problem to permit District to respond to the complaint and participate in a resolution session and mediation. Therefore, Student’s amended complaint is insufficient.
District’s Notice of Insufficiency is granted with leave to amend. If Student amends, the complaint shall include specific facts describing Student’s eligibility for special education and his unique needs, when the actions complained of occurred, what occurred, and how and for what time period those actions denied Student access to a free appropriate public education.
MEDIATOR ASSISTANCE FOR NON-REPRESENTED PARENTS: A parent who is not represented by an attorney may request that OAH provide a mediator to assist the parent in identifying the issues and proposed resolutions that must be included in a complaint. 9 Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Student’s amended complaint is insufficiently pled under section title 20
United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file a second amended complaint under title 20
United States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II). 10
3. The second amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20
United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to timely file a second amended complaint, the amended
complaint will be dismissed.
9 Ed. Code, § 56505.
10 The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: June 03, 2015
/S /
PAUL H. KAMOROFF
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings