California OAH special education order · February 13, 2026

Order Following Expedited Prehearing Conference for Hearing by Videoconference

OAH Case No. 2026010936 · ALJ Cynthia Fritz

OAH overruled Simi Valley's objection that a Section 504 manifestation meeting was outside its jurisdiction, because whether the district had a 'basis of knowledge' of Student's disability is a disputed fact requiring a hearing.

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

At the expedited prehearing conference, Simi Valley objected that Student's issues were outside OAH's jurisdiction because the January 22, 2026, manifestation determination meeting was a Section 504 meeting. The ALJ overruled the objection. Student alleged Simi Valley had a basis of knowledge that Student had a disability when the January 2026 discipline was imposed, and that is a disputed fact the hearing must decide. The order set a three-day videoconference hearing starting February 24, 2026, defined the issues, and ordered Simi Valley to file its response to the complaint by February 17, 2026.

Why it matters

A district cannot avoid an expedited IDEA discipline hearing just by calling the manifestation meeting a Section 504 meeting. If the parent claims the district already knew the child might have a disability, OAH will hear evidence on that 'basis of knowledge' question first.

Key authority cited

  • Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082(g)
  • Ed. Code § 56505(e)(7)
  • J.W. v. Fresno Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431
  • M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189
  • Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49
  • Ed. Code § 56505.1(h)

Topics

expedited hearing manifestation determination basis of knowledge section 504 jurisdiction discipline

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 FOLLOWING EXPEDITED PREHEARING

CONFERENCE FOR HEARING BY VIDEOCONFERENCE

FEBRUARY 13, 2026

On February 13, 2026, Administrative Law Judge Cynthia Fritz, Office of Administrative Hearings, held a prehearing conference by videoconference. The Administrative Law Judge is called an ALJ. The Office of Administrative Hearings is called OAH. The prehearing conference is called a PHC.

Grandparent, as Parent’s educational representative, and Parent, appeared on behalf of the Student. Attorneys Sheryl Bailey and Caroline Rothans appeared on behalf of Simi Valley Unified School District, called Simi Valley. The PHC was recorded. Based upon discussion with the parties, the ALJ issues the following order:

HEARING DATES, TIMES, AND LOCATION

EXPEDITED DUE PROCESS HEARING

The hearing will take place on February 24, 25, and 26, 2026, and continue day to day at the discretion of the ALJ. The hearing will begin at 9:30 AM each day and generally end at 3:30 PM, unless otherwise ordered. The parties anticipate it will take a half to three days to complete the hearing. Additional hearing dates will be discussed with the ALJ during the hearing, if needed.

HEARING LOCATION

OAH is authorized to conduct due process hearings by videoconference or telephone. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) OAH will conduct the due process hearing by videoconference using the Zoom application. Unless otherwise ordered, participants are required to appear by videoconference using computer or device with video capability and Zoom.

The parties must immediately notify all potential witnesses of the hearing dates and must subpoena witnesses, if necessary, to ensure that the witnesses will appear to testify. A party’s failure to notify or subpoena a witness to testify will not be considered good cause to continue the hearing. Instructions for issuing and responding to subpoenas and optional forms for subpoenas can be found on the website at https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Case-Types/Special- Education/Forms/Subpoenas?search=special%20education%20subpoena.

EXPEDITED ISSUES AND PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

PRELIMINARY ISSUE: BASIS OF KNOWLEDGE

Simi Valley objected to Student’s issues because the manifestation determination meeting was a Section 504 meeting and thus, not within OAH’s jurisdiction. The objection was overruled. Although section 504 issues are not within OAH’s jurisdiction, Student alleged in his complaint that Simi Valley had a basis of knowledge that Student was a student with a special education disability at the time of the events in Student’s complaint. The question of whether Simi Valley had a basis of knowledge at that time is a disputed fact and must be determined through an evidentiary due process hearing.

Basis of knowledge is a threshold question to determine whether OAH has jurisdiction in this matter. The parties are on notice that they should present evidence regarding basis of knowledge at the expedited due process hearing.

EXPEDITED ISSUES

The issues at the due process hearing, and proposed resolutions, as alleged in the complaint and clarified by the parties and the ALJ during the PHC are:

1. Did Simi Valley have a basis of knowledge that Student was a child with a

disability entitling Student to the protections of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act with regard to the discipline imposed by Simi Valley in January 2026?

2. Did Simi Valley conduct a legally incompliant manifestation determination

meeting on January 22, 2026, by:

a. Failing to have relevant members of the team present, specifically, a

school psychologist or qualified clinician to interpret evaluation data;

b. Failing to review all relevant information in Student’s file, specifically,

by withholding information from Parent;

c. Failing to review relevant information provided by Parent; and

d. Predetermining the manifestation determination decision?

The ALJ has clarified the statement of issues as allowed by the holdings in J.W. v.

Fresno Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2010) 626 F.3d 431, 442-443, and Ford v. Long Beach Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 291 F.3d 1086, 1090. (But see M.C. v. Antelope Valley Union High Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189, 1196, fn. 2 [dictum].) The issues in the complaint have been reorganized and rephrased for clarity. No change in substance has been made. A party believing that an issue has been misstated must file a notice in writing, before the first day of hearing, stating its concern and referring to supporting portions of the complaint.

PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS

The resolutions requested by Student are summarized and include to: nullify the manifestation determination meeting, vacate the manifestation determination findings;

nullify all missed assignments, and grading penalties; return Student to Valley View Middle School; bar Simi Valley from any further disciplinary proceedings and expulsion proceedings, order an independent functional behavioral assessment and behavior intervention plan; declaratory relief, and training.

OAH has not received a copy of Simi Valley’s response to Student’s complaint.

Simi Valley must file its response by 9:00 AM on February 17, 2026. (M.C. v. Antelope Valley Unified School Dist. (9th Cir. 2017) 858 F.3d 1189, 1199-1200.)

EXHIBITS

The parties must serve their exhibits on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). The parties must upload their exhibits electronically according to the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically.

Timely uploading electronic hearing exhibits five business days before the first day of hearing constitutes that party’s timely exchange of evidence in compliance with Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7). If further assistance is needed, please contact OAH at OAHSEOps@dgs.ca.gov.

Except for good cause shown, or unless used solely for rebuttal or impeachment, any exhibit not timely exchanged as required by Education Code section 56505, subdivision (e)(7) must not be admitted into evidence at the hearing unless the ALJ rules that it is admissible.

IDENTIFYING EXHIBITS AND PAGE NUMBERS

Each exhibit must be identified by a letter and number. Student must use the letter S before the number to identify Student’s exhibits. Simi Valley must use the letter D before the number to identify its exhibits. For example, S-1 means Student’s exhibit 1 and D-1 means Simi Valley’s exhibit 1. A cover sheet with this identifying letter and number should be the first page of each exhibit. The electronic evidence program will automatically number the exhibits and additional page numbering or bates stamping should not be added. A table of contents for all exhibits must be included with the exhibits.

CONTENT

Each exhibit must consist of one document. Separate documents may not be combined into one exhibit. Emails or letters may be consolidated into one exhibit if they are part of a single chain of messages. Exhibits should be in chronological order.

Parties should include resumes or curriculum vitae for each witness expected to testify as an expert. Simi Valley must include a copy of the school calendar for each school year in question.

Electronic copies of exhibits filed with OAH must be filed by 5:00 PM at least five business days before the first day of hearing. Please refer to the General Order OAH issued with the Scheduling Order that contains the Order Setting Procedures for Filing Exhibits Electronically. It includes instructions for how to file exhibits electronically.

Beginning three business days before the hearing, the electronic evidence system will not allow parties to upload exhibits unless permitted by the ALJ during the hearing at the ALJ’s discretion.

WITNESSES

The parties must serve their list of witnesses on each other in compliance with Education Code section 56505. No party must be permitted to call any witnesses not timely disclosed except for good cause shown, supported by written declaration under penalty of perjury, and at the discretion of the ALJ.

Parties are responsible for ensuring that all participants are familiar with and follow the Instructions for Joining the Online Due Process Hearing provided with this Order. Participants who have not previously used the Zoom application, may find informative instructions on at by visiting, Getting Started with Zoom at https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/categories/200101697.

The parties are responsible for ensuring that witnesses join the virtual hearing room at the designated date and time to testify. Witnesses are required to join the due process hearing by computer and appear by videoconference unless they do not have the necessary computer equipment. If a witness does not have the necessary equipment, the ALJ may permit the witnesses to appear by audio only or by telephone.

“Audio only” means using a computer without video. A witness’s inability to attend the hearing by videoconference will be discussed at the start of the hearing.

The parties are responsible for producing their own witnesses unless otherwise ordered by the ALJ. Parties must make witnesses under their control reasonably available. The parties must schedule their witnesses to avoid delays in the hearing and to minimize or eliminate the need for calling witnesses out of order.

The ALJ has discretion to limit the number of witnesses and the time allowed for testimony. Education Code, section 56505.1, subdivision (h), empowers the ALJ to set a reasonable limit on the length of the hearing after consideration of four factors. The first two factors are the issues to be heard and the complexity of facts to be proven. The second two factors are the ability of the parties or their representatives to present their respective cases and the parties’ estimates of the time needed to present their cases.

MEET AND CONFER

The parties are encouraged to review and shorten their witness and exhibit lists before the hearing. Evidence may be excluded if it is repetitive, cumulative, or insufficiently probative to justify the time it would take to hear.

The parties are ordered to meet and confer no later than 5:00 PM on February 19, 2026, to discuss scheduling witnesses and how much time each witness will take. The parties must discuss any issues related to counsel and witnesses appearing by videoconference for hearing, electronically viewing exhibits during the hearing, and subpoenas, if any. The parties should attempt to eliminate duplicate exhibits from their hearing exhibits. The parties must discuss whether they can produce a written stipulation as to pertinent facts, contentions, resolutions and the authenticity and admissibility of documents to shorten the length of time needed for the hearing.

As part of the meet and confer process, Simi Valley must inform Student which proposed witnesses are its employees, and must also identify the witnesses on Student’s list that require a subpoena. Simi Valley may agree to accept service for a witness under its control or provide Student with the witness’s most recent contact information.

PARTICIPANT INFORMATION FORM

Both parties have an ongoing obligation to ensure that OAH has current information on the Participant Information Form filed with OAH and must file an updated Form as necessary. The Participant Information Form is not served upon the opposing party. The ongoing obligation to ensure that the Participant Information Form filed with OAH is current does not change the parties’ statutory obligation to timely disclose their witnesses to the other party(s) at least five business days prior to hearing.

The parties must file an updated Participant Information Form to inform OAH of any changes, additions, or deletions, including the required information no later than 5:00 PM at least two business days before the first day of hearing.

Any contact information provided must be used for the limited purpose of issuing subpoenas or for contacting a witness to attend the hearing. Any contact information must not be disclosed to any other person.

EVIDENCE PRESENTATION

In an administrative proceeding, the burden of proof is ordinarily on the party requesting the hearing. (Schaffer v. Weast (2005) 546 U.S. 49, 62.) Student requested the hearing and bears the burden of proof. Student’s case-in-chief must be presented first, followed by Simi Valley.

WITNESS LISTS

The parties must provide a joint proposed witness list to the ALJ on the first day of hearing. The list should include the first and last name of the witness, which party is calling the witness to testify, and include dates and time estimates of each witness’s expected testimony. In the event an agreement cannot be reached, each party must prepare a separate written list. Student must have witnesses available in case there is no agreement.

At the beginning of the hearing, the ALJ and the parties will discuss the length of time anticipated for each witness and scheduling issues for individual witnesses. The ALJ will finalize the witness schedule. Parties must be prepared at the end of each day to discuss the witnesses to be presented the next day and the estimated time for the testimony of each witness.

SCOPE OF WITNESS EXAMINATION

Each witness will be called to testify only once, except for rebuttal purposes. All parties must examine a witness on all issues when the witness is first called to testify.

Requiring a witness to appear only once takes priority over the order in which parties present their case-in-chief.

AUDIO ONLY OR TELEPHONIC TESTIMONY

Whether a witness may appear by audio only or telephone instead of videoconference is a matter within the discretion of the ALJ. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 5, § 3082, subd. (g).) Any party seeking to present a witness by audio only or telephone must request permission to do so before the hearing. Any party seeking to present a witness who cannot access exhibits electronically must inform the ALJ at the beginning of the hearing.

ELECTRONIC RECORDINGS

AUDIO RECORDING

A party may request permission to make an audio recording of the hearing.

Permission to make an audio recording is subject to the ALJ’s discretion and based upon the following conditions:

1. the OAH recording is the only official recording;

2. the parties must turn their recording device on and off at the same time

that the ALJ is on and off the record to avoid recording conversations while off the record;

3. operation of the party’s recording mechanism will not be allowed to delay

the hearing;

4. a party’s recording may not be given, provided or played to a witness, or

potential witness;

5. the recording is subject to the same confidentiality as the due process

hearing; and

6. participants must not take screenshots of the videoconference nor share

or publish any portion of the videoconference or audio recording.

Student’s and Simi Valley’s requests to make an audio recording of the hearing are granted. The parties shall not use an artificial intelligence application or program to record the hearing.

VIDEO RECORDING

No party, witness or anyone else may videorecord any part of the proceedings or stream live through any means.

RECORDINGS AS EXHIBITS

Recordings may not be uploaded electronically without the ALJ’s permission. The ALJ has discretion to admit or exclude evidence in the form of a recording. Any request to submit a recording must be considered at the time of hearing.

The ALJ may grant or deny the request or grant the request subject to certain conditions. The party offering the recording must establish that all or a part of the recording is relevant. The ALJ may request a transcript of the portion of the recording requested or have the party offering the recording to provide an exact identifiable portion of the recording the party seeks to admit. The identities of any person speaking on the portion of the tape being introduced must be established. An ALJ may allow the opposing party to offer additional portions of a recording to establish the context, or to rebut, the recording.

MOTIONS

At the time of the prehearing conference, there were pending motions. The parties inquired about the pending motions. The parties were informed that the pending motions were ruled on and were in the process of being issued by staff. The parties can filed motions for reconsideration after the order have been issued. No other prehearing motions are pending or contemplated. Any motion that was not filed three business days before the PHC, must be supported by a declaration under penalty of perjury establishing good cause why the motion was not timely filed.

STIPULATIONS

Stipulations to pertinent facts, contentions, resolutions and authenticity and admissibility of documents are encouraged. Any proposed stipulation must be submitted to the assigned ALJ in writing prior to the start of the hearing.

CONDUCT OF PARTICIPANTS AND HEARING ROOM DECORUM

All participants to the videoconference should observe the same decorum as in an in-person due process hearing. Participants must conduct themselves in a professional and courteous manner at all times. Cellular phones, telephones and computer notifications must be shut off or set to silent during the hearing unless the ALJ grants permission otherwise. Participants should appear from a private location, unless otherwise ordered. Participants should take reasonable efforts to minimize background noise and maintain adequate room lighting. Use of virtual background images are at the discretion of the ALJ. Witnesses are prohibited from reading exhibits, documents, notes, text messages, telephones or computers while testifying, unless permitted to do so by the ALJ. The parties, their representative and witnesses are prohibited from passing notes to, exchanging electronic messages with, or signaling the witness in any way while the witness is testifying.

LANGUAGE INTERPRETERS AND REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS

Neither party requested an accommodation or language interpreter. A party or participant in this case, such as a witness, requiring reasonable accommodation to participate in a mediation or hearing may contact OAH at (916) 263-0880, or send an email to OAHADA@dgs.ca.gov as soon as the need is known. The e-mail should have “Request for Accommodation” in the Subject Line. Additional information concerning requests for reasonable accommodation is available on OAH’s website at:

https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OAH/Services/Page-Content/Office-of-Administrative-Hearings- Services-List-Folder/Request-Reasonable-Accommodations-for-OAH-Legal- Proceedings.

HEARING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

The hearing is closed to the public. Special education hearings are closed to the public unless Student requests the hearing to be open to the public.

SETTLEMENT

The parties are encouraged to continue working together to reach an agreement before the due process hearing. The parties must inform OAH in writing immediately if they reach a settlement or otherwise resolve the dispute before the scheduled hearing.

In addition, if a settlement is reached within five days of the scheduled start of the due process hearing, the parties must also inform OAH of the settlement by telephone at (916) 263-0880. At the same time, the parties should send the signature page of the signed agreement or a letter withdrawing the case to OAH by visiting OAH Secure e-file at https://www.applications.dgs.ca.gov/oah/oahsftweb.

If a full and final written settlement agreement is reached after 4:00 PM the day prior to hearing, the parties must leave a voicemail message regarding the settlement at (916) 274-6035. The parties should also leave contact information such as cellular phone numbers of each party or counsel for each party.

Dates for hearing will not be cancelled until the letter of withdrawal or signature page of the signed agreement has been received and processed by OAH. If an agreement in principle is reached, the parties should plan to attend the scheduled hearing unless different arrangements have been agreed upon by the assigned ALJ. The assigned ALJ will check for messages before the hearing.

If the matter settles subject to board approval, in addition to a signed copy of the signature page of the settlement agreement, the parties must provide the date of the next board meeting. The hearing dates will not be cancelled without this information.

FAILURE TO COMPLY

The failure to comply with this Order may result in the exclusion of evidence or other sanctions.

ORDER INCLUDES ALL RULINGS

This Order includes all rulings made at the prehearing conference. Any discussion and conversation not referenced in this Order is not binding on the ALJ conducting the hearing and may not be relied upon by the parties. The parties should be aware that, at hearing, the ALJ conducting the hearing has discretion to reconsider any part of this Order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Cynthia Fritz Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings