KM obo NM v Edison Township BOE | Case 08345-19 | 2019-07-26

New Jersey is an Equal Opportunity Employer State of New Jersey OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FINAL DECISION OAL DKT. NO. EDS 08345-19 AGENCY DKT. NO. 2019-29957 K.M. ON BEHALF OF N.M., Petitioner, v. EDISON TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION, Respondent. _______________________________ K.M., petitioner, pro se Rita F. Barone , Esq., for respondent (Purcell, Mulcahy & Flanagan, LLC, attorneys) Record Closed: July 25, 2019 Decided: July 26, 2019 BEFORE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ, ALJ: STATEMENT OF THE CASE Petitioner failed to appear for the hearing of this case and failed to contact this tribunal to explain why. Should this case be dismissed? Yes. For the unreasonable failure to comply with any order of a judge , or with any requirement of the Uniform

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 08345-19 2 Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6, the judge of a case may take any appropriate case-related action, including dismissal. See N.J.A.C. 1:1-14.14. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On May 21, 2019 , petitioner filed a petition for due process hearing with the Department of Education, Office of Special Education Policy and Dispute Resolution (OSEPDR). On June 20, 2019, OSEPDR 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 -18.5. On May 21, 2019 , OSEPDR had scheduled the hearing for July 2, 2019, at the OAL in Mercerville. On July 1, 2019, respondent requested an adjournment of the hearing, which was granted, and the hearing was scheduled for July 18, 2019. K.M. then requested a venue change from Mercerville to Newark, which was also granted, and the hearing was rescheduled for July 25, 2019. On July 25, 2019, petitioner did not appear for the hearing. FINDINGS OF FACT On July 25, 2019 , petitioner did not appear for the hearing in this case . Respondent, however, did appear. To date, petitioner has not contacted this tribunal to explain why. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW For the unreasonable failure to comply with any order of a judge , or with any requirement of the Uniform Administrative Procedure Rules, N.J.A.C. 1:1-1.1 to -21.6, the judge of a case may take any appropriate case -related action, including dismissal. See

OAL DKT. NO. EDS 08345-19 3 N.J.A.C. 1:1-14.14. In this case, petitioner failed to appear for the hearing of this case and failed to contact this tribunal to explain why. To date, petitioner has still not contacted this tribunal to explain why. Given this unreasonable failure to appear, I CONCLUDE that this case should be dismissed under the authority granted to me by N.J.A.C. 1:1-14.14. ORDER Given my findings of fact and conclusions of law, I ORDER that this case be DISMISSED. This decision is final under 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(1)(A) and 34 C.F.R. § 300.514 (2018) and is appealable by filing a complaint and bringing a civil action either in the Law Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey or in a district court of the United States. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(2); 34 C.F.R. § 300.516 (2018). If the parent or adult s tudent believes that this decision is not being fully implemented with respect to a program or service, then this concern should be communicated in writing to the Director of OSEPDR. July 26, 2019 DATE BARRY E. MOSCOWITZ, ALJ Date Received at Agency July 26, 2019 Date Mailed to Parties: dr