K.D. and C.D. obo C.D. v. Watchung Hills Regional BOE and Greenbrook Township BOE | Case 00298-25 | 2025-01-13

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer State of New Jersey OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FINAL DECISION SUFFICIENCY CHALLENGE OAL DKT. NO. EDS 00298-25 AGENCY DKT. NO. 2025-38476 K.D. AND C.D. ON BEHALF OF C.D., Petitioners, v. WATCHUNG HILLS REGIONAL BOARD OF EDUCATION AND GREENBROOK TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION, Respondent. _________________________________ K.D. and C.D., petitioners, pro se Robin S. Ballard , Esq., for respondent , Watchung Hills Regional Board of Education (Schenck, Price, Smith & King, LLP ) Isabel Machado, Esq., for respondent, Greenbrook Township Board of Education (Machado Law Group, attorneys) Record Closed: January 13, 2025 Decided: January 13, 2025 BEFORE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ, CALJ:

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 00298-25 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE This decision addresses a sufficiency challenge under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(A), 34 C.F.R. § 300.508(d) (2019), and N.J.A.C. 6A:14-2.7(f). FINDINGS OF FACT Based on the documents submitted concerning this sufficiency challenge, I FIND the following as FACT: On December 20, 2024, petitioners filed a request for due process hearing with the Department of Education, Office of Special Education (OSE), against respondents. Petitioners allege that the LEA did not allow them to participate in the IEP meeting on December 19, 2024 ; that the LEA provided an IEP without their input ; and that the IEP does not confer a FAPE for their child. On January 6, 2025, respondent, Green Brook Township Board of Education, filed a sufficiency challenge with OSE under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(c)(2)(A), 34 C.F.R. § 300.508(d) (2019), and N.J.A.C. 6A:14 -2.7(f), alleging that it is not the LEA identified in the due process complaint. January 6 , 202 5, the OSE transmitted the case to the Office of Administrative Law (OAL) under the Administrative Procedure Act, N.J.S.A. 52 :14B-1 to -15, and the act establishing the OAL, N.J.S.A. 52:14F-1 to -23, for a hearing under the Uniform Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6, and the Special Education Program, N.J.A.C. 1:6A-1.1 to -18.4. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A), a due process complaint must provide notice of the name of the child and a description of the child, among other things : (I) the name of the child, the address of the residence of the child (or available contact information in the case of a homeless child), and the name of the school the child is attending; (II) in the case of a homeless child or youth (within the meaning of section 725(2) of the McKinney -Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)), available contact

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 00298-25 3 information for the child and the name of the school the child is attending; (III) a description of the nature of the problem of the child relating to such proposed initiation or change, including facts relating to such problem; and (IV) a proposed resolution of the problem to the extent known and available to the party at the time. [20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii).] In this case, petitioners provided notice of the all the requirements contained in 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A)(ii). Greenbrook, however, argues that the petition is insufficient because it is not the L EA identified in the due process complaint. Such an argument, however, is premature. No competent evidence currently exists to make such a determination; such an argument is more appropriate for a motion to dismiss . Accordingly, I CONCLUDE that the notice contained in the due process complaint is sufficient under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(7)(A), and that Greenbrook may renew its argument before the judge assigned to the case. ORDER Given my findings of fact and conclusions of law, I ORDER that the sufficiency challenge is DENIED, and that the timelines for conducting a due process hearing must CONTINUE .

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 00298-25 4 This decision is final under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(1)(A) and is appealable under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(g)(2) by filing a petition and bringing a civil action in the Law Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey or in the United States Dis trict Court for the State of New Jersey. January 13, 2025 DATE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ Acting Director and Chief ALJ Date Received at Agency: January 13, 2025 Date Sent to Parties: January 13, 2025 ljb