California OAH special education order · January 22, 2026
Order Denying Request for Continuance and Setting Prehearing Conference and Hearing
OAH Case No. 2026010420 · ALJ Jessica Plitt
OAH denied Glendora's request to continue its own due process hearing. The district did not show its Executive Director was essential or that its attorney was truly unavailable.
This case went to decision
Glendora Unified School District v. Student: Glendora Unified's psychoeducational assessment upheld; district need not fund an independent evaluation for a second grader with ADHD. (2026)
Summary
Glendora asked to move its own due process hearing to April 7, 2026. It said its Executive Director of Special Education would be at a paid professional development conference, and its attorney had other hearings, vacations, and spring break conflicts. Student opposed, arguing the issues were ripe and more delay would hurt Student. OAH found no good cause because there was no showing that the Executive Director knew Student or was an essential witness or representative, none of the attorney's other cited hearings were actually in progress, and Glendora filed the complaint knowing about its own schedule conflicts.
Why it matters
A district that files its own due process complaint cannot easily delay the hearing for staff conferences or attorney scheduling conflicts. Parents can successfully oppose such requests by pointing to the 45-day timeline and the lack of a showing that the absent person is essential.
Key authority cited
- 34 C.F.R. § 300.515(a)
- Ed. Code, § 56502, subd. (f)
- Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3)
- Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020
- Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332
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:
GLENDORA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT,
v.
PARENTS ON BEHALF OF STUDENT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2026010420
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE AND
SETTING PREHEARING CONFERENCE AND HEARING
JANUARY 22, 2026
On January 21, 2026, Glendora Unified School District, Glendora, filed a request to continue the due process hearing with the Office of Administrative Hearings, OAH.
On January 21, 2026, Student filed their prehearing conference statement and included their opposition to the continuance in the prehearing conference statement.
Glendora contends the hearing should be continued because Glendora’s representative, the Executive Director of Special Education, is attending a previously scheduled and paid for professional development conference. Glendora provided a declaration and confirmation of the Executive Director’s unavailability. Glendora requested a continuance to April 7, 2026, because in addition to the representative’s unavailability, the attorney is currently scheduled for multiple hearings over the next two months and also has a preplanned vacation the week of February 24, 2026, and March 6,
2026. Additionally, Glendora is requesting the continuance date because Glendora has
spring break the week of March 30, 2026. Student contends the hearing should not be continued because the issues are ripe for adjudication and that further delay would not serve Student’s interests.
OAH must conduct a due process hearing and issue a decision within 45 days of receiving the due process complaint, unless an extension is granted. (34 C.F.R.
§ 300.515(a); Ed. Code, §§ 56502, subd. (f), 56505, subd. (f)(3).) Resolving the due process hearing quickly is legally required. Hearings may only be continued if "good cause" is established. (Ed. Code, § 56505, subd. (f)(3).) OAH is guided by the Administrative Procedure Act and the California Rules of Court when ruling on continuance motions. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 1, § 1020; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.)
Good cause to continue a hearing may include:
• An essential lay or expert witness is unavailable because of death, illness,
or other excusable circumstances;
• A party is unavailable because of death, illness, or other excusable
circumstances;
• A party’s attorney is unavailable because of death, illness, or other
excusable circumstances;
• A new attorney substitutes in, but only if the party establishes that the
substitution is required in the interests of justice;
• A new party is added, and the new party has not had a reasonable
opportunity to prepare for trial, or other parties have not had a reasonable opportunity to prepare for trial regarding the new party's involvement;
• A party is unable to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other
material evidence despite diligent efforts; or
• The case has a significant and unexpected change which makes the case
not ready for trial.
Generally, continuances are disfavored. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).)
Glendora did not establish good cause to continue the due process hearing. No information was provided to show that the Executive Director’s presence is essential.
There is no declaration that he has personal knowledge of Student or that he is the only representative necessary for the adjudication of this complaint or information showing that he is an essential witness. In the declaration provided by Glendora, the attorney did not establish sufficient cause to show her own unavailability. She references previously scheduled due process hearings and sites case numbers, but none of those cases are currently in progress. Student opposes this continuance as well. Glendora filed this complaint knowing of their previously scheduled due process hearings and OAH has the duty to resolve this complaint within the statutory timelines.
The request is denied. All prehearing conference and due process hearing dates are confirmed and will proceed as calendared.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Jessica Plitt Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings