California OAH special education order · February 12, 2026
Order Denying Motion to Amend Complaint and Determining Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint as Moot
OAH Case No. 2026010936 · ALJ Cynthia Fritz
OAH denied Student's motion to amend a dual expedited/non-expedited complaint because amending would reset the expedited hearing timeline, which IDEA does not allow; Simi Valley's motion to dismiss became moot.
This case went to decision
Student v. Simi Valley Unified School District: Simi Valley Unified must set aside a seventh grader's expulsion for skipping IDEA discipline protections; predetermination claim denied. (2026)
Summary
Student filed a complaint with both expedited and non-expedited issues, then moved to amend it before the expedited hearing. Simi Valley opposed, arguing expedited issues cannot be amended, and also moved to dismiss the amended complaint. OAH denied the amendment because an amended complaint restarts hearing timelines, and IDEA does not allow continuances of expedited matters, which must be heard within 20 school days. Because the amendment was denied, Simi Valley's motion to dismiss was moot.
Why it matters
In a case with expedited issues, families generally cannot amend the complaint because doing so would push back the expedited hearing. OAH pointed to other options: dismiss and refile, amend non-expedited issues after the expedited decision issues, or file a new complaint on new issues.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(ii)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(B)
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.
SIMI VALLEY UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2026010936
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND
DETERMINING MOTION TO DISMISS AMENDED
COMPLAINT AS MOOT
FEBRUARY 12, 2026
On January 27, 2026, Parent on behalf of Student filed a due process hearing request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, called OAH, naming Simi Valley Unified School District, called Simi Valley. OAH designated this matter a dual case with both expedited and non-expedited issues. The expedited due process hearing is set to begin on February 24, 2026. The non-expedited due process hearing is set to begin on March 17, 2026.
On February 6, 2026, Student filed a motion to amend the complaint and an amended complaint. On February 10, 2026, Simi Valley filed opposition to Student’s motion to amend the complaint arguing expedited issues cannot be amended. Simi Valley also filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint.
An amended complaint may be filed when the other party consents in writing and is given the opportunity to resolve the complaint through a resolution session, or when the hearing officer grants permission. The hearing officer may grant permission at any time more than five days before the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C.
§1415(c)(2)(E)(i).) The filing of an amended complaint restarts the applicable timelines for the due process hearing. (20 U.S.C. §1415(c)(2)(E)(ii).)
However, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, called IDEA, does not allow continuances of expedited matters, which must be heard within 20 school days of the date the hearing was requested. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(k)(4)(b).) Granting leave to amend a complaint would reset the applicable hearing dates in this matter, including the expedited hearing dates, which is precluded by statute.
Thus, Student’s request to amend the complaint is denied. Student may dismiss his request for due process hearing and file a new complaint on expedited and non- expedited issues, may amend non-expedited issues after the expedited decision has been issued, or file a new complaint on issues not raised in the current request for due process hearing.
Because the undersigned has denied Student’s request to amend the complaint at this time, Simi Valley’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint is moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Cynthia Fritz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings