California OAH special education order · February 23, 2022
Order of Determination of Sufficiency of Due Process Complaint
OAH Case No. 2022020501 · ALJ Rommel P. Cruz
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it described its problems and proposed resolutions only by pointing to documents "uploaded for this case" that were never filed with OAH.
Summary
Arcata Elementary filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. OAH agreed the complaint was insufficient. Its three suggested problems relied on earlier uploaded documents that OAH never received, and all allegations must appear in the complaint itself. The proposed resolutions, including a full assessment, an effective PBIP, and emotional disturbance eligibility, were only partly stated, so Student was given 14 days to file an amended complaint or face dismissal.
Why it matters
Parents must write out each problem, the supporting facts, and the proposed fixes in the complaint itself or in an attachment filed with it, not by pointing to documents sent elsewhere. Parents without lawyers can ask OAH for a mediator to help them draft 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, § 56505
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- 71 FR 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.
ARCATA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2022020501
ORDER OF DETERMINATION OF SUFFICIENCY OF
DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
FEBRUARY 23, 2022
On February 11, 2022, Parent on behalf of Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Arcata Elementary School District. On February 18, 2022, Arcata Elementary filed a timely 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).
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 suggests three problems, all insufficiently pled. The complaint merely references earlier documents “uploaded for this case” to describe the problems. However, Student failed to file any documents in this case prior to the filing of Student’s complaint. And even then, all allegations must be in the complaint and not in any associated document.
Student’s complaint does not describe the problems relating to the proposed change regarding Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing Student a free appropriate public education. The complaint fails to include the required problem description and the facts relating to the problems to provide Arcata Elementary with an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of Student’s complaint.
Furthermore, a complaint is required to include proposed resolutions to the problem, to the extent known and available to the party at the time. (20 U.S.C.
§1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(IV).) The proposed resolution stated in Student’s complaint are not well-defined. Though the complaint’s proposed resolutions include a full assessment of Student, an effective “PBIP”, and eligibility for special education services under the category of emotional disturbance, the complaint also references earlier uploaded documents not received by OAH, to describe proposed resolutions for one or more of the problems. Student’s complaint only provides Arcata Elementary with a partial understanding of Student’s proposed resolutions. Accordingly, Student’s complaint is insufficient.
MEDIATOR ASSISTANCE FOR NON-REPRESENTED PARENTS: A parent without 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 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).
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall include a description of Student’s claims contained within the body of the amended complaint or an attachment to the amended complaint. The amended complaint shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Rommel P. Cruz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings