California OAH special education order · April 10, 2026
Order Determining Due Process Complaint Insufficient
OAH Case No. 2026040028 · ALJ Ashok Pathi
OAH found Student's complaint insufficient because it did not identify which IEP or IEPs were challenged or when Rocklin made the disputed testing accommodation decisions; Student may amend within 14 days.
Summary
Rocklin filed a Notice of Insufficiency challenging Student's complaint, which alleged that Rocklin denied Student a FAPE through its testing and grading accommodations and grading policies. OAH found all three claims insufficiently pled. Even reading the complaint liberally, it did not say which IEP was at issue or when the challenged accommodation decisions were made, and the order states Rocklin is not required to guess. Student may file an amended complaint within 14 days or the case will be dismissed, and Rocklin may later move to dismiss any amended issues it believes fall outside OAH's jurisdiction.
Why it matters
A complaint should name the specific IEP or IEPs being challenged and give dates for the decisions in dispute, so the district does not have to guess. Parents without a lawyer can ask OAH for a mediator to help them write an amended complaint.
Key authority cited
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(D)
- 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II)
- Ed. Code, § 56505
- 71 FR 46540-46541, 46699
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.
ROCKLIN UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.
OAH CASE NUMBER 2026040028
ORDER DETERMINING DUE PROCESS COMPLAINT
INSUFFICIENT
APRIL 10, 2026
On March 24, 2026, Student filed a Due Process Hearing Request, called a complaint, with the Office of Administrative Hearings, referred to as OAH, naming Rocklin Unified School District. On April 8, 2026, Rocklin timely filed a Notice of Insufficiency as to the complaint.
APPLICABLE LAW
The named parties have the right to challenge the complaint’s sufficiency.
(20 U.S.C. § 1415(b) & (c).) The party filing the complaint is not entitled to a hearing unless the complaint meets the requirements of title 20 United States Code section 1415(b)(7)(A).
A complaint is sufficient if it:
1. describes the problem relating to the proposed change regarding the
Student’s identification, evaluation, or educational placement, or providing the Student a free appropriate public education;
2. includes facts about the problem; and
3. includes a proposed resolution to the extent known and available to the party
at the time. (20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii)(III) & (IV).)
These requirements prevent vague and confusing complaints, and promote fairness by providing the named parties with sufficient information to know how to prepare for the hearing and how to participate in resolution sessions and mediation.
(See H.R.Rep. No. 108-77, 1st Sess. (2003), p. 115; Sen. Rep. No. 108-185, 1st Sess.
(2003), pp. 34-35.)
The complaint provides enough information when it provides “an awareness and understanding of the issues forming the basis of the complaint.” (Sen. Rep. No. 108- 185, supra, at p. 34.) The pleading requirements should be liberally construed in light of the broad remedial purposes of the IDEA and the relative informality of the due process hearings it authorizes. (Alexandra R. ex rel. Burke v. Brookline School Dist. (D.N.H., Sept.
10, 2009, CIV. 06-CV-0215-JL) 2009 WL 2957991[nonpub. Opn.]; Escambia County Bd. Of Educ. V. Benton (S.D. Ala. 2005) 406 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1259-1260; Sammons v. Polk County School Bd. (M.D. Fla., Oct. 28, 2005, 8:04CV2657T24EAJ) 2005 WL 2850076 [nonpub. Opn.]; but cf. M.S.-G v. Lenape Regional High School Dist. Bd. Of Educ. (3d Cir.
2009) 306 Fed.Appx. 772, 775 [nonpub. Opn.].) Whether the complaint is sufficient is a matter within the sound discretion of the Administrative Law Judge. (Assistance to States for the Educ. Of Children with Disabilities & Preschool Grants for Children with Disabilities (Aug. 14, 2006) 71 FR 46540-46541, 46699.)
DISCUSSION
Student’s complaint alleges three insufficiently pled claims. Student’s claims generally allege Rocklin denied Student a FAPE related to testing and grading accommodations and Rocklin’s grading policies.
Even with a liberal reading of Student’s complaint, it is unclear which individualized education program, called an IEP, or IEPs are at issue. A reader can presume that Student is challenging his current IEP, but the complaint does not indicate this, and Rocklin is not required to guess. Student also challenges certain “erroneous determination[s]” related to an unspecified testing accommodation but does not indicate when Rocklin made these determinations. Accordingly, Student’s three issues are insufficiently pled. Student may file an amended complaint as ordered below.
Rocklin asserts that certain issues in Student’s complaint fall outside of OAH’s limited jurisdiction. Rocklin may move to dismiss any issues it believes are outside of OAH’s jurisdiction if Student includes those issues in an amended complaint.
MEDIATOR ASSISTANCE FOR NON-REPRESENTED PARENTS: A parent without an attorney may request that OAH provide a mediator to assist the parent in identifying the issues and proposed resolutions that must be included in a complaint. (Ed. Code, § 56505.) Parents are encouraged to contact OAH for assistance if they intend to amend their due process hearing request.
ORDER
1. Student’s complaint is insufficiently pled under section title 20 United States
Code 1415(c)(2)(D).
2. Student shall be permitted to file an amended complaint under title 20 United
States Code section 1415(c)(2)(E)(i)(II).
3. The amended complaint shall comply with the requirements of title 20 U.S.C.
section 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii), and shall be filed not later than 14 days from the date of this order.
4. If Student fails to file a timely amended complaint, the complaint will be
dismissed.
5. All dates previously set in this matter are vacated.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Ashok Pathi Administrative Law Judge Office of Administrative Hearings