California OAH special education order · January 25, 2024
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2024010580 · ALJ Linda Dowd
OAH found Student's complaint against Inglewood insufficient because it gave no facts about Student's challenges, services, IEP dates, or the alleged violations, and allowed 14 days to amend.
Summary
Inglewood filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint, which raised a single claim that Inglewood denied Student a free appropriate public education by failing to offer an appropriate program. OAH found the complaint insufficient. It did not describe Student's challenges, his current or needed services, or the alleged procedural and substantive violations. It also had an 'X' where the IEP meeting date belonged and a template placeholder where Student's name should be. The proposed resolutions of compensatory education and more services were vague but met the legal minimum. Student may file an amended complaint within 14 days, or the case will be dismissed, and all dates were vacated.
Why it matters
A complaint that only names a disability and makes general claims of FAPE denial will not survive a sufficiency challenge. Families should describe the specific needs, services, IEP meetings, and violations at issue, and should carefully proofread template-based complaints before filing.
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)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185
- Escambia County Board of Educ. v. Benton (S.D.Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 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.
INGLEWOOD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024010580
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
INSUFFICIENT
JANUARY 25, 2024
On January 17, 2024, Student filed a due process hearing request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Inglewood Unified School District. On January 24, 2024, Inglewood 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).
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 46540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student’s complaint alleges only one claim, which is insufficiently pled. Student alleges Inglewood denied him a free appropriate public education and caused him to miss out on educational opportunities by failing to offer a program that met Student’s individual and unique needs. Aside from Student’s age, grade level, and disability category of eligibility, the only information Student included was that Student had a well-documented history of challenges related to social, audio visual, motor skills, and behavior. Student’s complaint is incomplete and fails to provide Inglewood with the required description of the problem and the facts relating to the problem.
Student did not describe what his social, audio visual, motor skills, or behavior challenges were. Student did not include what services he received or what services he thinks he needed. Student had the letter X listed where the date of the IEP team meeting should be. Student alleged Inglewood committed several procedural and substantive violations but did not include any information as to what the violations were. Student has “#Matter.Child’s Name#” listed instead of Student’s actual name.
Student’s complaint is devoid of facts that would allow Inglewood to have an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint. Therefore, Student’s complaint is insufficient.
Student’s proposed resolutions request compensatory education and an increase to Student’s services. 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 resolutions stated in Student’s complaint are not well-defined. However, Student has met the statutorily required standard of stating a resolution to the extent known and available to him at the time.
ORDER
1. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under title 20 United States Code
section 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 United
States Code 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, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
Linda Dowd Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings