California OAH special education order · June 13, 2017
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2017051145 · ALJ Linda Johnson
OAH found Student's claims that District failed to identify Student and provide services sufficient, but found the Section 504 accommodations claim insufficient because it gave no facts about which accommodations were missing.
Summary
District filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's three-issue due process complaint, and Student did not respond. OAH found Issues One and Two sufficient because they described District's failure to identify Student as a student with a disability and to provide appropriate services, gave facts about health diagnoses, failing grades, and missed incentives, and proposed resolutions. Issue Three was insufficient because it only stated that District failed to provide Section 504 accommodations, without saying which accommodations were at issue or what District failed to provide. Student was given 14 days to amend, or the case would proceed only on Issues One and Two. OAH also said District's argument that Issues Two and Three were outside OAH's jurisdiction belonged in a motion to dismiss, not a notice of insufficiency.
Why it matters
A claim that only states a legal conclusion, such as "District failed to provide 504 accommodations," will be found insufficient; parents should name the specific accommodations and what the district failed to do. Districts that want to challenge OAH's jurisdiction must file a motion to dismiss rather than raise it in a sufficiency challenge.
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
- Ed. Code, § 56502
- Escambia County Bd. 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. 2017051145 v. ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
ORANGE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. COMPLAINT
On May 25, 2017, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request (complaint) with the Office of Administrative Hearings naming Orange Unified School District. On June 9, 2017, District filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s complaint. Student did not respond.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties to a due process hearing request have the right to challenge the sufficiency of the complaint. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) 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 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. (20 U.S.C.
§ 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).) 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. (See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess. (2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, supra, at p. 34.) 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 A request for a due process hearing under Education Code section 56502 is the due process complaint notice required under title 20 U.S.C. section 1415(b)(7)(A).
it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept. 10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. opn.]; Escambia County Bd. 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, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. of Educ. (3d Cir. 2009) 306 Fed.Appx.
772, 775 [nonpub. opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46,540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student’s complaint alleges three claims in the complaint, some of which are sufficient and some which are insufficient. The issues are discussed below.
Issues One and Two2 are sufficiently pled to put District on notice as to the basis of Student’s claims. Student describes the problem as District’s failure to identify Student as a student with a disability, and its failure to provide appropriate services. Student provides some facts about health diagnoses, failing grades, and missed incentives, and Student provides a proposed resolution to both issues.
With regard to Issue Three, Student fails to allege any facts that relate to the claim.
Issue three is simply a statement that District failed to provide accommodations under Section 504. Student does not list what accommodations are at issue, or what District failed to provide. Therefore, Student has failed to state sufficient facts supporting this claim, and the claim is insufficient.
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. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Issues One and Two of Student’s complaint are sufficient under title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
District also alleges Issues two and three are outside of OAH’s jurisdiction, however, that argument is inappropriate for a notice of insufficiency. If District wishes to make that argument it needs to file a motion to dismiss.
2. Issue Three of Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(D).
3. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).
4. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
5. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the hearing shall proceed
only on Issues One and Two in Student’s complaint.
DATE: June 13, 2017
LINDA JOHNSON
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.