California OAH special education order · June 9, 2025
Order Denying Student's Requests for Reconsideration
OAH Case No. 2025051034, 2025050648 · ALJ Ted Mann
OAH denied Student's requests to reconsider the order consolidating Student's and Murrieta Valley's cases because Student offered no new facts, circumstances, or law and only repeated earlier arguments.
Summary
On June 2, 2025, OAH granted Murrieta Valley's motion to consolidate the two cases and continue the hearing. Student filed two apparently identical requests asking OAH to reconsider the consolidation, and Murrieta Valley opposed. OAH denied reconsideration because Student only repeated arguments already made in the opposition and at the prehearing conference, without new facts, circumstances, or law. All existing dates were confirmed.
Why it matters
A request for reconsideration must point to new or different facts, circumstances, or law, and should explain why they were not raised earlier. Repeating arguments OAH has already heard will not succeed.
Key authority cited
- Gov. Code, § 11521
- Code Civ. Proc., § 1008
- Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192
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 CONSOLIDATED MATTERS INVOLVING:
PARENT ON BEHALF OF STUDENT,
and
MURRIETA VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025051034
OAH CASE NUMBER 2025050648
ORDER DENYING STUDENT’S REQUESTS FOR
RECONSIDERATION
JUNE 9, 2025
On June 2, 2025, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge issued an order Granting Murrieta Valley’s Motion to Consolidate and Motion for Continuance. On June 3, 2025, Student filed a Request to Reconsider Motion to Consolidate. On June 4, 2025, Student filed a Request to Reconsider Motion to Consolidate. The two Requests appear to be identical. On June 6, 2025, Murrieta Valley filed an opposition arguing that Student had offered no new facts or law to support the request for reconsideration.
The Office of Administrative Hearings will generally reconsider a ruling upon a showing of new or different facts, circumstances, or law justifying reconsideration, when the party seeks reconsideration within a reasonable period of time, generally within ten days. (See, e.g., Gov. Code, § 11521; Code Civ. Proc., § 1008.) The party seeking reconsideration may also be required to provide an explanation for its failure to previously provide the different facts, circumstances or law. (See Baldwin v. Home Savings of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1199-1200.)
Student offers no new facts, circumstances or law to support reconsideration.
Student simply reiterates the arguments previously made in Student’s Opposition to Motion to Consolidate and in oral argument at the prehearing conference. In the absence of any new facts, circumstances or law, the motion for reconsideration is denied.
ORDER
Student has not established the June 2, 2025 Order should be reconsidered. The motion for reconsideration is denied. All dates set in this matter are confirmed.
Ted Mann Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings