California OAH special education order · January 5, 2021
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2020120337 · ALJ Sabrina Kong
OAH deemed Student's complaint sufficient because Long Beach filed its notice of insufficiency more than 15 days after receiving the complaint, and the complaint would have been sufficient anyway.
Summary
Long Beach filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint, and Student did not respond. OAH found the notice untimely because it was filed and served more than 15 days after Long Beach received the complaint, so the complaint was deemed sufficient by law. The ALJ added that even if the notice had been timely, the complaint identified the issues, gave adequate facts, and proposed resolutions. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A district must challenge a complaint's sufficiency within 15 days of receiving it, or the complaint is automatically deemed sufficient. Parents do not need to respond to a late notice of insufficiency to keep their case moving.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(C)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (d)(1)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 71 Fed. Reg. 46540-46541, 46699
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,
v.
LONG BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2020120337
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF DUE
PROCESS COMPLAINT
JANUARY 5, 2021
On December 9, 2020, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Long Beach Unified School District, called Long Beach . On December 28, 2020, Long Beach filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint. Student did not file a response to Long Beach’s Notice of Insufficiency.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(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).
The complaint is deemed sufficient unless a party notifies OAH and the other party in writing within 15 days of receiving the complaint that the party believes the complaint has not met the notice requirements. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(C); Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (d)(1).)
A complaint is sufficient if it: (1) describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education; (2) includes facts about the problem; and (3) includes a proposed resolution 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 was filed on December 9, 2020. Long Beach’s NOI was filed with OAH on December 28, 2020, and served on the same day, which was more than 15 days after it received Student’s complaint. District’s NOI was not timely filed.
Therefore, Student’s complaint is deemed sufficient. Further, even if Long Beach’s NOI was timely filed, Student’s complaint was sufficient as it identified the issues, adequate facts about the problem, and proposed resolutions to permit Long Beach to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation.
ORDER
1. The complaint is deemed sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(c)(2)(C) and Education Code section 56502, subdivision (d)(1).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Sabrina Kong Sabrina Kong (Jan 5, 2021 14:56 PST)
Sabrina Kong Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings