California OAH special education order · October 22, 2025
Order Revising Issues for Hearing
OAH Case No. 2025030050 · ALJ Charles Marson
OAH revised the six hearing issues after both Student and Los Alamitos objected to the prehearing conference order, finding some of the requested changes had merit.
This case went to decision
Student v. Los Alamitos Unified School District: Los Alamitos Unified prevails on all six claims brought by a graduated student with autism; no relief ordered. (2026)
Summary
After OAH issued its October 14, 2025 Order Following Prehearing Conference, Student filed a Notice of Incorrect Issues. Los Alamitos filed its own Notice of Incorrect Issues and opposed Student's. OAH found some of the requested revisions had merit and restated the six issues for hearing. The revised issues cover child find and assessment, adequacy of services, supports and goals, implementation of IEPs, data on goal progress, Parents' meaningful participation, and Student's exclusion from her May 14, 2024 IEP team meeting, with time frames running from March 3, 2023.
Why it matters
The prehearing conference order defines what will actually be heard, so parties should promptly flag any misstatement of the issues or time periods. OAH will correct the issues after a timely notice, even when the other side objects.
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.
LOS ALAMITOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025030050
ORDER REVISING ISSUES FOR HEARING
OCTOBER 22, 2025
On October 14, 2025, OAH issued an Order Following Prehearing Conference that set forth the issues to be heard in the upcoming due process hearing.
On October 17, 2025, Student filed a Notice of Incorrect Issues.
On October 21, 2025, Los Alamitos filed a Notice of Incorrect Issues and Opposition to Student’s Notice of Incorrect Issues.
Some of the requests for revision of the issues have merit. The issues for hearing are revised below, with modifications indicated in italics and strikeouts.
1. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE from March 3, 2023, through the
2022-2023 and 2023-2024 and 2024-2025, school years because it failed to identify, locate and assess Student in the areas of functional behavior, educationally related mental health, speech and language, transition, executive functioning, and academics?
2. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE from March 3, 2023, through the
2022-2023 and 2023-2024 and 2024-2025 school years by offering legally insufficient services, and supports and goals in the areas of specialized academic instruction, mental health, speech and language, and transition?
3. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE in the school years 2022-
2023,from March 3, 2023, through the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 school years, and 2024-2025 by materially failing to implement parts of every governing IEP during those years?
4. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE in the school years 2022-2023
(from March 3, 2023 through the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 and 2024- 2025 school years by failing to retain collect and provide data on Student’s goal progress services and supports?
5. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE in the school years 2022-2023
(from March 3, 2023 through the 2022-2023 and 2023-2024 school years, and 2024-2025, by denying Parents meaningful participation in the IEP process, specifically by disregarding or denying their requests for programming and for data on Student’s goals and services?
6. Did Los Alamitos deny Student a FAPE by excluding her from
meaningful participation in her May 14, 2024 IEP team meeting? once she turned 18? The hearing will proceed on the issues as stated above.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Charles Marson Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings