California OAH special education order · January 21, 2025
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Sufficient
OAH Case No. 2025010075 · ALJ June Lehrman
OAH found Student's complaint sufficient, rejecting Oakdale's notice of insufficiency because the detailed 16-page complaint stated six clear issues with ample facts for Oakdale to respond.
Summary
Oakdale filed a notice of insufficiency challenging Student's due process complaint. The complaint alleged six issues: that Oakdale failed to conduct educationally related mental health and functional behavioral assessments, and failed to offer home hospital instruction, appropriate psychological and counseling services, other social-emotional supports, and appropriate goals. OAH found the 16-page complaint clearly identified the issues and gave enough facts for Oakdale to respond and take part in a resolution session and mediation. The complaint was found sufficient, and all mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A complaint that clearly lists each issue and backs it up with specific facts will hold up against a district's insufficiency challenge. OAH reads pleading requirements liberally, and dates stay on track when the complaint is sufficient.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)
- Sen. Rep. No. 108-185 (2003)
- Escambia County Bd. of Educ. v. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248
- 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:
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
v.
OAKDALE JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025010075
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
SUFFICIENT
JANUARY 21, 2025
On January 6, 2025, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Oakdale Joint Unified School District. On January 17, 2025, Oakdale 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 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
The facts alleged in Student’s complaint are sufficient. Student’s six clearly stated issues allege that Oakdale failed to conduct educationally related mental health and functional behavioral assessments, and failed to offer home hospital instruction, appropriate psychological and counseling services and other social and emotional supports, and appropriate goals. Student’s detailed 16-page complaint identifies the issues and ample facts about the problem to permit Oakdale to respond and participate in a resolution session and mediation.
Therefore, Student’s statement of the claims is sufficient.
ORDER
1. The complaint is sufficient under title 20 United States Code section
1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).
2. All mediation, prehearing conference, and hearing dates in this matter are
confirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
June Lehrman Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings