California OAH special education order · January 27, 2022
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction
OAH Case No. 2022010223 · ALJ Paul H. Kamoroff
OAH denied Student's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, finding Odyssey's requests to move Student to an interim setting and implement an IEP without consent fall squarely within OAH's authority.
This case went to decision
Odyssey Charter School v. Student: Odyssey Charter School may move a kindergartner with autism to its South Campus special day class for up to 45 school days. (2022)
Summary
Odyssey Charter School filed a due process complaint. It sought to place Student in an interim alternative educational setting based on Student's conduct, and to implement an October 19, 2021 IEP, both without Parents' consent. Student moved to dismiss, arguing OAH lacked jurisdiction, and Odyssey opposed. OAH denied the motion because Student did not explain why OAH lacked jurisdiction, and the IDEA expressly allows a district to seek a placement change when keeping the current placement is substantially likely to cause injury. Both the expedited and non-expedited matters will proceed as scheduled.
Why it matters
Families cannot block a district's due process case over interim placement or implementing an IEP without consent by challenging OAH's jurisdiction. Federal and state law expressly allow districts to bring these claims, so parents should prepare to defend on the merits.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6)
- Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(b)
- Wyner v. Manhattan Beach Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026
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:
ODYSSEY CHARTER SCHOOL,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022010223
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS FOR
LACK OF JURISDICTION
JANUARY 27, 2022
On January 7, 2022, Odyssey Charter School filed a Request for Due Process Hearing, referred to as a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, naming Parents on behalf of Student. The Office or Administrative Hearings is referred to as
OAH.
On January 24, 2022, Student filed a Motion to Dismiss, alleging OAH lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the issues alleged in the complaint. On January 26, 2022, Odyssey filed an opposition.
APPLICABLE LAW
The purpose of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. § 1400 et.
seq.) is to “ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education,” and to protect the rights of those children and their parents. (20 U.S.C. § 1400(d)(1)(A), (B), and (C); see also Ed. Code, § 56000.) A party has the right to present a complaint “with respect to any matter relating to the identification, evaluation, or educational placement of the child, or the provision of a free appropriate public education to such child.” (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6); Ed. Code, § 56501, subd. (a) [party has a right to present a complaint regarding matters involving proposal or refusal to initiate or change the identification, assessment, or educational placement of a child; the provision of a free appropriate public education to a child; the refusal of a parent or guardian to consent to an assessment of a child; or a disagreement between a parent or guardian and the public education agency as to the availability of a program appropriate for a child, including the question of financial responsibility].) The jurisdiction of OAH is limited to these matters. (Wyner v.
Manhattan Beach Unified School. Dist. (9th Cir. 2000) 223 F.3d 1026, 1028-1029.)
A school district may request a due process hearing to authorize a change of placement if the district believes that maintaining the current placement of the child is substantially likely to result in injury to the child or to others. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(3)(A)
and (B)(ii)(II); 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(b)(ii).)
DISCUSSION
Odyssey alleges three issues in its complaint. Issues one and two seek to place Student in an appropriate interim alternative educational setting, without Parents’ consent, based upon Student’s conduct. Issue three seeks to implement an October 19, 2021 individualized education program, without Parents’ consent. Student’s motion fails to explain why OAH lacks jurisdiction over these issues, especially as the IDEA and implementing regulations permit Odyssey Charter School’s action.
Based upon the above statutes, these issues fall squarely within OAH’s jurisdiction to resolve these claims. Accordingly, Student’s motion is denied.
ORDER
1. Student’s Motion to Dismiss is denied. The expedited and non-expedited
matters shall proceed as scheduled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Paul H. Kamoroff Paul H Kamoroff Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings