California OAH special education order · April 12, 2021
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2021030899 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH deemed Student's complaint sufficient because West Contra Costa filed its Notice of Insufficiency more than 15 days after receiving the complaint, making the challenge untimely.
Summary
West Contra Costa Unified School District challenged the sufficiency of Student's due process complaint, which also named Oakley Union Elementary School District. West Contra Costa admitted it received the complaint on March 24, 2021, but it did not file and serve its Notice of Insufficiency until April 9, 2021. That is more than the 15 days the law allows after receiving a complaint. OAH did not review the complaint's content. It deemed the complaint sufficient and confirmed all mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates.
Why it matters
A district has only 15 days from when it receives a complaint to challenge its sufficiency, and the clock runs from its own receipt, not from OAH's official filing date. A late challenge fails automatically, and the complaint is treated as sufficient.
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)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1006, subd. (h)
- 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.
OAKLEY UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND
WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2021030899
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY
OF DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
APRIL 12, 2021
On March 25, 2021, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Oakley Union Elementary School District and West Contra Costa Unified School District.
On April 9, 2021, West Contra Costa Unified School District filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
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 Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260;
Sammons v. Polk County School Board (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ)
2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist.
Board 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 filed her complaint with OAH shortly after 5:00 PM on March 24, 2021.
Therefore, OAH deems Student’s complaint filed on the next business day, March 25, 2021. (Cal. Code Regs., tit 1, § 1006, subd. (h).)
West Contra Costa’s Notice of Insufficiency admits West Contra Costa received Student’s complaint on March 24, 2021, without specifying if its receipt was at or after 5:00 PM. West Contra Costa’s Notice of Insufficiency was dated, filed with OAH, and served on April 9, 2021, which is more than 15 days after it received Student’s complaint.
West Contra Costa’s Notice of Insufficiency was not timely filed. Therefore, Student’s complaint is deemed sufficient.
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.
Kara Hatfield Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings