California OAH special education order · June 13, 2019
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2019060205 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient as to Placer County SELPA because none of its 15 claims described any violation by the SELPA, and allowed Student 14 days to amend.
Summary
Placer County SELPA filed a timely notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint, which named both Rocklin Unified and the SELPA. OAH found that all 15 claims were insufficiently pled against the SELPA because the complaint did not describe any violation by the SELPA or give it an understanding of the claims against it. Student may file an amended complaint within 14 days. If Student does not, the SELPA will be dismissed and the case will proceed against Rocklin Unified only.
Why it matters
When a complaint names more than one agency, it must state what each agency did wrong. A SELPA named without specific facts about its own conduct can be removed from the case. Parents without a lawyer can ask OAH for a mediator's help in drafting an amended complaint.
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, § 56502
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
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. 2019060205 v.
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF
ROCKLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SUFFICIENCY OF DUE PROCESS
AND PLACER COUNTY SPECIAL COMPLAINT
EDUCATION LOCAL PLAN AREA.
On June 5, 2019, Parent on behalf of Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, also known as a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings naming Rocklin Unified School District and Placer County Special Education Local Plan Area. On June 11, 2019, Placer County SELPA filed a timely Notice of Insufficiency as to Student’s complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
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). 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 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 15 claims, which are all insufficiently pled against Placer County SELPA. The complaint fails to provide a description of any alleged violations on the part of Placer County SELPA related to the proposed initiation or change concerning the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of Student, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to him. The complaint fails to provide Placer County SELPA with an awareness and understanding of the claims against it. Accordingly, the complaint is insufficient as to Placer County SELPA.
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. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled against Placer County SELPA under
section title 20 United States Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II). The filing of an amended complaint will restart the applicable timelines for a due process hearing.
3. 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.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, Placer County SELPA will
be dismissed as a party to Student’s complaint and the hearing shall proceed against Rocklin Unified only.
DATE: June 13, 2019
ROMMEL P. CRUZ
Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings