California OAH special education order · May 24, 2024
Order Determining Non-Expedited Issues in Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2024050771 · ALJ Kara Hatfield
OAH found Student's three-sentence complaint insufficient as to non-expedited FAPE claims because it lacked a problem description and facts, but kept the expedited discipline claims and hearing dates in place.
Summary
Capistrano filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's complaint, which raised both expedited (disciplinary) and non-expedited issues. OAH took no action on the expedited claims, because the law does not allow sufficiency challenges in expedited hearings and there is not enough time for that process, and it confirmed the expedited dates. OAH found that the non-expedited claims, including any claim that Capistrano denied Student a free appropriate public education, did not describe the problem or give facts about it. Student has 14 days to file an amended complaint or those claims will be dismissed, and the non-expedited dates were vacated.
Why it matters
A district cannot use a sufficiency challenge to delay an expedited discipline appeal. Non-expedited FAPE claims still need a clear problem description and supporting facts, and parents without lawyers can ask OAH for a mediator to help 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(k)(3)
- Ed. Code § 56505
- 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:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
CAPISTRANO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2024050771
ORDER DETERMINING NON-EXPEDITED ISSUES IN
DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT INSUFFICIENT
MAY 24, 2024
On May 17, 2024, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Capistrano Unified School District. OAH identified the complaint as potentially having issues subject to both an expedited and non-expedited due process hearing. On May 23, 2024, Capistrano filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
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).
Title 20 United States Code section 1415(k)(3) permits a party to request an expedited hearing for specific reasons. Specifically, an expedited hearing can be requested to appeal a disciplinary change of placement, such as placement in an alternative education setting or a manifestation determination regarding student conduct. This section requires an expedited hearing start within 20 school days from the hearing request. There is no provision for expedited hearings under section 1415(k) to test the complaint’s sufficiency. Indeed, there is insufficient time to complete the notice of insufficiency process in expedited hearings.
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.)
OAH takes no action on Capistrano’s Notice of Insufficiency as to any expedited claims that relate to an appeal of a disciplinary change of placement.
With regard to any non-expedited claims, specifically any claim alleging Capistrano denied Student a free appropriate public education, Student’s three sentence complaint is insufficiently pleaded. The complaint fails to provide Capistrano with the required problem description and the facts relating to the problem.
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. OAH takes no action on Capistrano Unified School District’s Notice of
Insufficiency related to any expedited issues in Student’s complaint.
2. The expedited mediation, expedited prehearing conference, and expedited
hearing dates in this matter are confirmed.
3. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pleaded under title 20 United States Code
section 1415(c)(2)(D) with respect to any non-expedited claims.
4. Student is permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).
5. 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.
6. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint regarding any
non-expedited issues, the non-expedited claims of the complaint will be dismissed.
7. The non-expedited prehearing conference and non-expedited hearing dates
previously set in this matter are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Kara Hatfield Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings