ACCO,CLOSED,CONMAG,MANADR
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA (Western Division − Los Angeles)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:16−cv−00984−GJS

S.D. et al v. Pasadena Unified School District et al Assigned to: Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish Cause: 42:12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Plaintiff

Date Filed: 02/11/2016 Date Terminated: 10/31/2019 Jury Demand: None Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities − Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

S. D. by and through his guardian ad litem L.R., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

represented by Candis R Bowles Disability Rights California 350 South Bixel Street Suite 290 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−213−8000 Fax: 213−213−8001 Email: candis.bowles@disabilityrightsca.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

James J Preis Mental Health Advocacy Services Inc 3255 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 902 Los Angeles, CA 90010 213−389−2077 Fax: 213−389−2595 Email: jpreis@mhas−la.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Maya L Ingram Morrison and Foerster LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 415−268−7000 Fax: 415−268−7522 Email: mingram@mofo.com TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Melinda Ruth Bird Disability Rights California 350 South Bixel Street Suite 290 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−213−8000 Fax: 213−213−8001 Email: melinda.bird@disabilityrightsca.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya Mental Health Advocacy Services Inc 3255 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 902 Los Angeles, CA 90010 213−389−2077 Fax: 213−389−2595 Email: nkurukulasuriya@mhas−la.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
D. D. by and through her guardian ad litem S.H., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

Ira Burnim Judge David L Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law 1090 Vermont Avenue NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20005 202−467−5730 Fax: 202−223−0409 Email: Irab@bazelon.org PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker Morrison and Foerster LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 6000 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−892−5274 Fax: 213−892−5454 Email: KStricker@mofo.com TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing Judge David L Bazelon Cener for Mental Health Law 1090 Vermont Avenue NW Suite 220 Washington, DC 20005 202−467−5730 Fax: 202−223−0409 Email: lewisb@bazelon.org ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel Morrison & Foerster LLP 707 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 6000 Los Angeles, CA 90017−3543 213−892−5200 Fax: 213−892−5454 Email: mharel@mofo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern Morrison and Foerster LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 6000 Los Angeles, CA 90017 213−892−5200 Fax: 213−892−5454 Email: rstern@mofo.com TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata Morrison and Foerster LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 6000 Los Angeles, CA 90017−3543 213−892−5200 Fax: 213−892−5454 Email: tmurata@mofo.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Candis R Bowles (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
T. D. by and through her guardian ad litem F.H., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

James J Preis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya L Ingram (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melinda Ruth Bird (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ira Burnim (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Candis R Bowles (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James J Preis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya L Ingram (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Plaintiff
E. D. by and through his guardian ad litem G.B., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

Melinda Ruth Bird (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ira Burnim (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Candis R Bowles (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James J Preis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya L Ingram (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melinda Ruth Bird (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ira Burnim (See above for address)

Plaintiff
W. D. by and through his guardian ad litem M.F., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Candis R Bowles (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James J Preis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya L Ingram (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melinda Ruth Bird (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ira Burnim (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel

Plaintiff
E D. by and through his guardian ad litem C.M., and on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated sturdents

(See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Candis R Bowles (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
James J Preis (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya L Ingram (See above for address) TERMINATED: 03/02/2016 LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Melinda Ruth Bird (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Nishanthi Amitha Kurukulasuriya (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Ira Burnim (See above for address) PRO HAC VICE ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Kelsey Marie Stricker (See above for address) TERMINATED: 05/29/2019
Lewis Bossing (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Maya Harel (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Robert S Stern (See above for address) TERMINATED: 12/21/2017
Tritia M Murata (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

V. Defendant Pasadena Unified School District
Defendant Brian McDonald in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena Unified School District

represented by Kristin Marie Myers Atkinson Andelson Loya Ruud and Romo PC 12800 Center Court Drive Suite 300 Cerritos, CA 90703−9364 562−653−3200 Fax: 562−653−3333 Email: kmyers@aalrr.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Marlon C Wadlington Atkinson Andelson Loya Ruud and Romo PC 12800 Center Court Drive Suite 300 Cerritos, CA 90703 562−653−3200 Fax: 562−653−3333 Email: mwadlington@aalrr.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
represented by Kristin Marie Myers (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
Marlon C Wadlington (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 02/11/2016
02/11/2016 02/11/2016 02/12/2016 02/12/2016 02/12/2016

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: 0973−17275510 − Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiffs Evan Doe, Sam Doe, Eric Doe, Tanya Doe, Deborah Doe, Walter Doe. (Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Deborah Doe(pty:pla), Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Eric Doe(pty:pla), Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Evan Doe(pty:pla), Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Sam Doe(pty:pla), Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Tanya Doe(pty:pla), Attorney Robert S Stern added to party Walter Doe(pty:pla))(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/11/2016)
2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Deborah Doe, Eric Doe, Evan Doe, Sam Doe, Tanya Doe, Walter Doe. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/11/2016)
3 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Leave to file Documents Under Seal and Declaration in Support Thereof filed by Plaintiffs Deborah Doe, Eric Doe, Evan Doe, Sam Doe, Tanya Doe, Walter Doe. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/11/2016)
4 NOTICE OF LODGING filed re EX PARTE APPLICATION for Leave to file Documents Under Seal and Declaration in Support Thereof 3 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Beverly Reid OConnell and Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (ghap) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT−DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (ghap) (Entered: 02/12/2016)

02/12/2016
02/12/2016
02/12/2016
02/12/2016 02/12/2016 02/16/2016 02/16/2016 02/17/2016
02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016

7 NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to attorney Ira A Burnim for Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. Pro Hac Vice application has not been received by the court. Please return your completed Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case, form G−64, or a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing of your application and the $325.00 fee and this notice immediately. Out−of−state federal government attorneys who are not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice are required to file a Pro Hac Vice application;no filing fee is required. You have been removed as counsel of record from this case for failure to submit this filing fee. (ghap) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
8 NOTICE OF FILING FEE DUE on Pro Hac Vice Application mailed to attorney Lewis Bossing for Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. Pro Hac Vice application has not been received by the court. Please return your completed Application of Non−Resident Attorney to Appear in a Specific Case, form G−64, or a copy of the Notice of Electronic Filing of your application and the $325.00 fee and this notice immediately. Out−of−state federal government attorneys who are not employed by the U.S. Department of Justice are required to file a Pro Hac Vice application;no filing fee is required. You have been removed as counsel of record from this case for failure to submit this filing fee. (ghap) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
9 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCIES in Attorney Case Opening RE: Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1 . The following error(s) was found: No Notice of Interested Parties has been filed. A Notice of Interested Parties must be filed with every partys first appearance. See Local Rule 7.1−1. Counsel must file a Notice of Interested Parties immediately. Failure to do so may be addressed by judicial action, including sanctions. See Local Rule 83−7. (ghap) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
10 STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES upon filing of the complaint by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (rfi) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
11 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D., (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/12/2016)
12 APPLICATION for attorney Ira A. Burnim to Appear Pro Hac Vice (PHV Fee of $325 receipt number 0973−17289125 paid.) filed by plaintiff D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. Application set for hearing on 2/22/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 02/16/2016)
14 ORDER ON APPLICATION OF NON−RESIDENT ATTORNEY TO APPEAR IN A SPECIFIC CASE PRO HAC VICE by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: granting 12 APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice by Attorney Ira A. Burnim on behalf of Plaintiffs, designating Candis Watson Bowles as local counsel. (lt) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
13 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: RE 3 EX PARTE APPLICATION. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Petitions for Guardian Ad Litem for Plaintiffs Sam Doe, Deborah Doe, Tanya Doe, Eric Doe, Walter Doe and Evan Doe; the Ex Parte Application to Proceed under Fictitious Names; and the Notice of Interested Parties be filed under seal in order to protect the identities of the minor Plaintiffs in this matter (rfi) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
15 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION to Proceed Under Fictitious Names re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
16 SEALED DOCUMENT re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties 11 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D..(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
17 SEALED DOCUMENT re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D..(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/17/2016)
18 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)

02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/17/2016 02/18/2016
02/18/2016
02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/19/2016

19 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)
20 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)
21 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)
22 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)
23 SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) Modified on 2/18/2016 (ec). Modified on 2/19/2016 (ec). (Entered: 02/17/2016)
24 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 19 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 21 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 23 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 18 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 22 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 20 . The following error(s) was found: Other error(s) with document(s) are specified below: The Sealed Ex Parte Applications do not comply with this Court's procedures in Under Seal Documents, Section 11. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (ec) (Entered: 02/18/2016)
25 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 19 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 21 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 23 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 18 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 22 , SEALED EX PARTE APPLICATION for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document, 13 20 by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The documents are stricken and counsel is ordered to refile the applications for appointment of guardian ad litem that comply with this Court's procedures in the Under Seal Documents, Section 11. (ec) (Entered: 02/18/2016)
26 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish vacating Order striking Sealed Ex Parte Applications for Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem 25 . (ec) (Entered: 02/19/2016)
27 SEALED DOCUMENT − ORDER GRANTING Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application to Proceed Unde rFictitious Names. UNDER SEAL. (jp) (Entered: 02/19/2016)
28 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AS GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered:

02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/19/2016 02/25/2016 02/26/2016 03/02/2016 03/03/2016
03/03/2016
03/14/2016
03/18/2016
04/01/2016 04/01/2016

02/22/2016)
29 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
30 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
31 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
32 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
33 SEALED DOCUMENT−ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM (pj) (Entered: 02/22/2016)
34 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, 1 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 02/25/2016)
35 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) 1 as to defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (jp) (Entered: 02/26/2016)
36 (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 03/02/2016)
37 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff E D., S. D., E. D., T. D., D. D., W. D., upon Defendant Pasadena Unified School District served on 2/29/2016, answer due 3/21/2016. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Denis McElroy, Executive Secretary Authorized to Accept Service in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 03/03/2016)
38 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff E D., S. D., E. D., T. D., D. D., W. D., upon Defendant Brian McDonald served on 2/29/2016, answer due 3/21/2016. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon Brian McDonald, in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena Unified School District in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons NOT returned. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 03/03/2016)
39 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Marlon C Wadlington counsel for Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. Adding Marlon C. Wadlington as counsel of record for Pasadena Unified School District and Brian McDonald for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Pasadena USD and Brian McDonald. (Attorney Marlon C Wadlington added to party Brian McDonald(pty:dft), Attorney Marlon C Wadlington added to party Pasadena Unified School District(pty:dft))(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 03/14/2016)
40 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Brian McDonald answer now due 4/1/2016; Pasadena Unified School District answer now due 4/1/2016, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, 1 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald; Pasadena Unified School District.(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 03/18/2016)
41 ANSWER to Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),, 1 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District.(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 04/01/2016)
42 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District, (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 04/01/2016)

04/04/2016 05/06/2016
05/06/2016
05/06/2016 05/09/2016 05/10/2016 05/10/2016 05/19/2016 06/08/2016 06/27/2016
08/01/2016 08/01/2016 08/04/2016 08/08/2016

43 ORDER SETTING SCHEDULING CONFERENCE by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Scheduling Conference set for 6/27/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (rfi) (Entered: 04/04/2016)
44 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Maya Harel on behalf of Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D. (Attorney Maya Harel added to party D. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Maya Harel added to party E D.(pty:pla), Attorney Maya Harel added to party E. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Maya Harel added to party S. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Maya Harel added to party T. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Maya Harel added to party W. D.(pty:pla))(Harel, Maya) (Entered: 05/06/2016)
45 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Tritia M Murata on behalf of Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D. (Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party D. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party E D.(pty:pla), Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party E. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party S. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party T. D.(pty:pla), Attorney Tritia M Murata added to party W. D.(pty:pla))(Murata, Tritia) (Entered: 05/06/2016)
46 STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Class Certification Motion filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Tritia M. Murata, # 2 Proposed Order)(Murata, Tritia) (Entered: 05/06/2016)
47 STIPULATION for Discovery as to Regarding Discovery Before The Rule 26(F) Conference Pursuant to Rule 26(D)(1) filed by plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Murata, Tritia) (Entered: 05/09/2016)
48 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation for Extension of Time 46 The current class certification deadline provided by Local Rule 23−3 ishereby vacated, and the Court shall set a new deadline at the June 27, 2016Scheduling Conference in this case. (rfi) (Entered: 05/10/2016)
49 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION REGARDING DISCOVERY BEFORE THE RULE 26(F) CONFERENCE PURSUANT TO RULE 26(D)(1) by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation for Discovery 47 The parties may commence discovery on May 9, 2016. (rfi) (Entered: 05/10/2016)
50 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D., served on 05/19/2016. (Harel, Maya) (Entered: 05/19/2016)
51 STATUS REPORT JOINT RULE 26(f) filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Harel, Maya) (Entered: 06/08/2016)
52 MINUTES OF SCHEDULING CONFERENCE held before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Counsel inform the Court that their selection for a settlement procedure pursuant to Local Rule 16−14 is Private Mediation. The parties are ORDERED to file no later than August 1, 2016, their respective position, not to exceed 5 pages as to phased discovery in this matter. The parties are further ORDERED to meet and confer and include in their position papers a realistic schedule, including any briefing for the class certification motion. Civil Jury Trial Order will be issued after the court reviews the briefs. IT IS SO ORDERED Court Reporter: Myra Ponce. (rfi) (Entered: 06/27/2016)
53 Defendants' Position Memorandum Per Court's June 27, 2016 Order filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District re: Scheduling Conference,, 52 (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 08/01/2016)
54 Plaintiffs' Position Memorandum Per Court's June 27, 2016 Order re: Scheduling Conference,, 52 (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 08/01/2016)
55 REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE in Support of the District's Position Memorandum Ordered by the Court filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 08/04/2016)
56 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Pre−Discovery Motion Telephone Conference for 8/16/2016 1:30 PM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court will initiate the call with counsel. Counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name and contact

08/16/2016
08/18/2016 09/07/2016 09/07/2016 09/07/2016 09/09/2016
09/14/2016 09/15/2016 09/22/2016 09/22/2016 09/22/2016

telephone number for each counsel appearing on the call.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/08/2016)
58 MINUTES OF Pre−Discovery Motion Telephone Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding the Parties' August 5, 2016 Email. The Court confers with counsel regarding their e−mail of August 5, 2016 concerning the production of educational records of Focus Point putative class members or non−party students. The Court orders the following briefing schedule: Plaintiffs motion to compel is due by August 18, 2016; the opposition is due by September 7, 2016; and the reply, if any is due by September 9, 2016. Upon completion of the briefing, the Court will determine if a hearing is necessary, atwhich time counsel will be notified. Court Recorder: N/A. (ec) (Entered: 08/19/2016)
57 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents filed by plaintiff D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order, # 2 Memorandum of Points and Authorities ISO Motion to Compel Responses to Reqeusts for Production and Interrogatories, # 3 Declaration of Mary Jo Dare)(Bird, Melinda) (Entered: 08/18/2016)
59 OPPOSITION to MOTION to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents 57 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Jerell Hill, # 2 Declaration Sundee M. Johnson, # 3 Declaration Kristin M. Myers)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 09/07/2016)
60 APPLICATION to file document under seal filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 09/07/2016)
61 SEALED DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION to file document under seal 60 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District.(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 09/07/2016)
62 REPLY in support MOTION to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents 57 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Candis Bowles ISO Plaintiffs Reply Re Motion to Compel, # 2 Exhibit A to Candis Bowles Declaration, # 3 Exhibit B to Candis Bowles Declaration, # 4 Exhibit C to Candis Bowles Declaration, # 5 Exhibit D to Candis Bowles Declaration, # 6 Exhibit Eto Candis Bowles Declaration, # 7 Exhibit F to Candis Bowles Declaration)(Bird, Melinda) (Entered: 09/09/2016)
63 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel for 9/22/2016 at 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish, located at the United States District Court, 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA in Courtroom 23, 3rd Floor.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 09/14/2016)
64 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: Currently pending before the Court is Defendants Request for Phased Discovery. (Dkt. No. 53 (hereinafter, Request).) After considering the papers, the Court finds thatDefendants' basis for phased discovery is inadequate; the issues of class certification discovery and merits discovery are intertwined. Accordingly, the Court finds that phased discovery is inappropriate. (rfi) (Entered: 09/15/2016)
65 REQUEST for Protective Order for discovery filed by plaintiff D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Bird, Melinda) (Entered: 09/22/2016)
66 NOTICE OF LODGING filed re MOTION to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents 57 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Re Motion to Compel)(Bird, Melinda) (Entered: 09/22/2016)
67 MINUTES OF Discovery Hearing held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel 57 . The Court confers with counsel regarding Plaintiffs' Motion and rules as follows: 1. Application to Seal Document 60 is granted; 2. Request for Protective Order is denied 65 . (See order for details). Court Recorder:

10/03/2016 10/03/2016
10/06/2016 10/07/2016
10/07/2016 10/07/2016 10/07/2016 10/12/2016 10/12/2016 10/12/2016 10/13/2016 10/13/2016
10/14/2016

CS. (ec) (Entered: 09/27/2016)
68 APPLICATION to for Leave to File Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. Application set for hearing on 10/17/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Marlon C. Wadlington, # 2 Proposed Order) (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
69 Amended APPLICATION to for Leave to File Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. Application set for hearing on 10/17/2016 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, Compilation of OAH Cases, # 2 Declaration Marlon C. Wadlington, # 3 Proposed Order) (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 10/03/2016)
70 STATUS REPORT Re Production of Documents Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Gail Standish's Civil Minutes filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 10/06/2016)
71 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Telephonic Discovery Status Conference for 10/13/2016 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court will initiate the call with counsel. Counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name and contact telephone number for each counsel appearing on the call THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 10/07/2016)
72 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to Amended APPLICATION to for Leave to File Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment 69 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Candis Bowles, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit G)(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 10/07/2016)
73 APPLICATION to file document under seal filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Maya Harel, # 2 Proposed Order)(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 10/07/2016)
74 SEALED DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION to file document under seal 73 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D..(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 10/07/2016)
75 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: granting 73 APPLICATION to Seal Document. Re: Sealed Declaration in Support Declaration 74 (rfi) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
76 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.to Status Report 70 Plaintiffs' Response to Defendants' Status Report Re Production of Documents (Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
77 REPLY In Support of Amended APPLICATION to for Leave to File Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment 69 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 10/12/2016)
78 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: the Court HEREBY orders that Defendants Request is granted. Defendants' Motion shall be filed by 11/21/2016; Plaintiffs' Opposition shall be filed by 12/19/2016; Defendants' Reply shall be filed by 12/26/2016; and, Oral Argument on the Motion will be heard on 1/9/2017 at 1:30 pm. 68 69 (rfi) (Entered: 10/13/2016)
81 MINUTES OF Telephone Discovery Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court confers with counsel regarding the burden of redacting identifying information from students educational records as discussed on the record, and directs counsel to meet and confer to discuss a potential proposal to accomplish this task. Counsel shall submit a joint proposal to the Court via its chambers email account. Court Recorder: CS. (ec) (Entered: 10/14/2016)
79 SEALED DOCUMENT Declaration of Candis Bowles in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants Pasadena Unified School District and Brian McDonald's

10/14/2016 10/24/2016
10/25/2016 11/10/2016
11/15/2016 11/17/2016 11/18/2016 11/29/2016 12/01/2016 01/19/2017

Application for Leave to File Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment re Order on Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal 75 filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit B, # 2 Exhibit C, # 3 Exhibit D)(Stern, Robert) (Entered: 10/14/2016)
80 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D., re Sealed Document, 79 served on October 14, 2016. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 10/14/2016)
82 NOTICE TO PARTIES by District Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. Effective October 31, 2016, Judge O'Connell will be located at the 1st Street Courthouse, COURTROOM 7C on the 7th floor, located at 350 W. 1st Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. All Court appearances shall be made in Courtroom 7C of the 1st Street Courthouse, and all mandatory chambers copies shall be hand delivered to the judge's mail box outside the Clerk's Office on the 4th floor of the 1st Street Courthouse. The location for filing civil documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing and for viewing case files and other records services remains at the United States Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Room G−8, Los Angeles, California 90012. The location for filing criminal documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing remains at Edward R. Roybal Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Room 178, Los Angeles, California 90012. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rrp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 10/24/2016)
83 DECLARATION of Candis Watson Bowles Re Status of Discovery filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 10/25/2016)
84 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Telephonic Discovery Status Conference for 11/15/2016 3:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court will initiate the call with counsel. Counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name and contact telephone number for each counsel appearing on the call.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 11/10/2016)
86 MINUTES OF Telephonic Discovery Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel 57 as it pertains to Defendants' production of student educational records at issue in this action. The Court directs counsel to continue to meet and confer regarding this production, and a protective order. Court Recorder: N/A. (ec) (Entered: 11/17/2016)
85 STIPULATION to Continue Defendants' Oral Argument and Briefing Schedule on its Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment from January 9, 2017 to March 13, 2017 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 11/17/2016)
87 ORDER RE STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTAND BRIAN MCDONALD'S PRELIMINARY MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation to Continue, 85 The Court orders the following briefing and hearing schedule: Defendants' Motion shall be filed by January 20, 2017. (rfi) (Entered: 11/18/2016)
88 STIPULATION to Amend the Briefing Schedule for Pasadena Unified School District and Brian McDonald's Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Harel, Maya) (Entered: 11/29/2016)
89 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation 88 The Court, having considered the Stipulation and good cause appearing, hereby GRANTS the Stipulation (rfi) (Entered: 12/01/2016)
90 STIPULATION to Continue Hearing on Preliminary Motion for Summary Judgement from January 20, 2017 to March 2, 2017 filed by Defendant Pasadena Unified School District.(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/19/2017)

01/20/2017
01/20/2017 01/20/2017 01/20/2017
01/20/2017 01/20/2017 01/25/2017 01/25/2017
01/25/2017 01/25/2017 02/22/2017
02/24/2017

91 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Stipulation to Continue 90 . The following error(s) was found: Proposed Document was not submitted as separate attachment. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (jloz) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
92 NOTICE OF LODGING filed re Stipulation to Continue 90 (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
93 STIPULATION to Stay Case pending Brief Stay of Discovery filed by Defendant Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
94 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. Motion set for hearing on 3/13/2017 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Jerell Hill, # 2 Declaration Marlon C. Wadlington, # 3 Exhibit 11, # 4 Exhibit 12, # 5 Exhibit 13, # 6 Exhibit 14, # 7 Exhibit 15, # 8 Proposed Order) (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
95 STATEMENT of of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law in Support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 94 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
96 EX PARTE APPLICATION to file document Exhibits 1−10 to Declaration of Jerell Hill under seal filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of Marlon C. Wadlington, # 2 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/20/2017)
97 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: granting 96 EX PARTE APPLICATION to Seal Document (rfi) (Entered: 01/25/2017)
98 SEALED DOCUMENT Exhibits 1−10 to Declaration of Jerell Hill re NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 56 94 , Order on Motion for Leave to File Document Under Seal 97 filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 01/25/2017)
99 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation to Stay Case 90 The hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment is continued to 4/17/2017 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (rfi) (Entered: 01/25/2017)
100 ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION FOR A BRIEF STAY OF DISCOVERY by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation to Stay Case 93 (rfi) (Entered: 01/25/2017)
101 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Telephonic Status Conference for 2/24/2017 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court will initiate the call with counsel. Counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name and contact telephone number for each counsel appearing on the call. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 02/22/2017)
102 MINUTES OF Telephone Status Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding discovery. The Court confers with counsel regarding the production of the redacted student records discussed by the Court on September 22, 2016 [Dkt. 67] with respect to Plaintiffs' Motion To Compel [Dkt. 57]. Defense counsel advises the Court that the documents have been redacted and will be produced during the week of February 27, 2017. The parties also informed the Court that they intend to seek a modification of the existing schedule from the District Judge to accommodate scheduled settlement mediation sessions. Court Recorder: N/A. (ec) (Entered: 02/24/2017)

02/28/2017 03/06/2017 03/30/2017
04/06/2017 04/06/2017 04/07/2017 05/12/2017 05/17/2017 06/06/2017
10/11/2017

103 Joint STIPULATION for Order To Extend Discovery and Briefing Timelines filed by plaintiff D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order Re Stipulation to Extend Discovery and Briefing Timelines)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 02/28/2017)
104 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, re Stipulation for Order 103 Motion set for hearing on 6/26/2017 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell.) The Court set a Status Conference in this matter for 4/10/2017 at 01:30 PM before Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. (rfi) (Entered: 03/06/2017)
105 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Telephonic Status Conference for 4/6/2017 11:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding the production of discovery. The Court will initiate the call with counsel. Counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name and contact telephone number for each counsel appearing on the call. Further, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents 57 is hereby denied without prejudice given the ongoing cooperation of the parties onthe remaining issues. (ec) (Entered: 03/30/2017)
106 Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Discovery and Briefing Timelines filed by Plaintiff D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 04/06/2017)
107 MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish re status of discovery. The Court confers with counsel regarding the status of discovery and settlement negotiations. The Parties inform the Court that they will be seeking a 30−day extension of all scheduled dates from the District Judge in order to continue working on a potential settlement. The Court notes that the Parties have been working diligently on both discovery and potential settlement, and appreciates their continued efforts. (ec) (Entered: 04/07/2017)
108 ORDER RE STIPULATION TO EXTEND DISCOVERY AND BRIEFING TIMELINES PENDING SETTLEMENT MEETINGS by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell. The ORDER OF APPEARANCE for a status conference on April 10, 2017 at 1:30 PM in Courtroom 7C is VACATED. See Order for further details. (jloz) (Entered: 04/07/2017)
109 Joint STIPULATION to Continue the Discovery and Briefing Timelines filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 05/12/2017)
110 ORDER by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell: The Court HEREBY orders the following discovery deadline and briefing and hearing schedule on Districts Motion for Summary Judgment: The Court VACATES the Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants may refile the Motion, if necessary on or before September 11, 2017. 94 Defendants Written Response and Production in Response to Request for Production of Documents − August 13, 2017. (rfi) (Entered: 05/17/2017)
111 TEXT ONLY ENTRY: NOTICE TO PARTIES: Effective June 1, 2017, Judge Standish is located at the Edward R. Roybal Federal Building, COURTROOM 640 on the 6th floor, located at 255 East Temple Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. All Court appearances shall be made in Courtroom 640 of the Roybal Federal Building, and all mandatory chambers copies shall be hand delivered to the judge's mail box located outside the Clerk's Office on the 12th floor of the Roybal Federal Building. The location for filing civil documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing and for viewing case files and other records services remains at the United States Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Room G−8, Los Angeles, California 90012. The location for filing criminal documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing remains at the Roybal Federal Building, 255 East Temple Street, Room 178, Los Angeles, California 90012. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rrey) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 06/06/2017)
112 STIPULATION to Extend Discovery Cut−Off Date to January 12, 2018 filed by Defendant Pasadena Unified School District. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 10/11/2017)

10/13/2017 10/27/2017
11/07/2017 12/19/2017 12/27/2017
05/21/2018 06/15/2018
06/22/2018 06/25/2018
06/27/2018 06/28/2018
07/05/2018

113 ORDER Re Stipulation to Extend Discovery Timelines 112 by Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell, the Court HEREBY orders the following discovery deadline: Defendants Written Response and Production in Response to Request for Production of Documents to 1/12/2018. (jp) (Entered: 10/13/2017)
114 ORDER OF THE CHIEF JUDGE (#17−106) approved by Judge Virginia A. Phillips. Pursuant to the directive of the Chief U.S. District Judge and in accordance with the rules of this Court, the following cases are ordered transferred from the calendar of Judge Beverly Reid O'Connell to the calendar of Judge Virginia A. Phillips for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:16−cv−00984 VAP(GJSx). (rn) (Entered: 10/27/2017)
115 STANDING ORDER ISSUED by Chief Judge Virginia A. Phillips. (bh) (Entered: 11/07/2017)
116 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Counsel filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Stern, Robert) (Entered: 12/19/2017)
117 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice (Other) 116 . The following error(s) was/were found: Incorrect event selected. Correct event to be used is: Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal G123. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (ak) (Entered: 12/27/2017)
118 STATUS REPORT filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration ISO Status Report, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 05/21/2018)
119 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Virginia A. Phillips: The Court has read and considered the status report filed by plaintiff (Docket No. 118). Plaintiff's request for status conference is granted. Counsel are hereby notified that the above matter is placed on the Court's calendar for status conference on Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. Lead Counsel responsible for the conduct and trial of the above case shall appear on date and time specified herein. (bm) (Entered: 06/15/2018)
120 (Attorney Kristin Marie Myers added to party Brian McDonald(pty:dft), Attorney Kristin Marie Myers added to party Pasadena Unified School District(pty:dft))(Myers, Kristin) (Entered: 06/22/2018)
121 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G−123) 120 . The following error(s) was/were found: Incomplete docket text: missing name of event In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (ak) (Entered: 06/25/2018)
122 RESPONSE BY THE COURT TO NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES IN ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOCUMENTS RE: Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G−123) 120 by Judge Virginia A. Phillips. The document is accepted as filed. (ab) (Entered: 06/27/2018)
123 MINUTES OF STATUS CONFERENCE RE: STATUS OF CASE held before Judge Virginia A. Phillips: The case is called and counsel state their appearance. The Court and counsel confer. Following discussion with counsel, the parties are instructed to contact the Courtroom Deputy Clerk to Magistrate Judge Standish to schedule a settlement conference. The Court orders discovery stayed. Further, the Court sets a status conference for August 13, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. The parties are instructed to submit a joint status report no later than August 6, 2018. Court Reporter: Myra Ponce. (ab) (Entered: 07/02/2018)
124 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Pre−Settlement Conference Telephone Call for 7/12/18 at 1:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. Counsel shall meet and confer to set up a bridge line and provide the call in information to the Court. Additionally, counsel shall notify the Court Clerk via email

07/12/2018 07/23/2018 08/06/2018 08/10/2018 09/20/2018
10/01/2018 10/03/2018
11/02/2018 11/05/2018 11/05/2018

at earlene_carson@cacd.uscourts.gov of the name of each counsel appearing on the call. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 07/05/2018)
125 MINUTES OF Pre−Settlement ConferenceTelephone Call held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish regarding scheduling a settlement conference. The Court schedules the settlement conference in this matter for 7/23/2018 at 11:00 AM. The confidential settlement conference letters are due on or before 7/18/2018. Court Recorder: N/A. (ec) (Entered: 07/12/2018)
126 MINUTES OF Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The settlement conference is conducted off the record. There is no settlement at this time, however, the parties are continuing to discuss settlement with the assistance of the Court. Counsel shall provide the Court with further informal mediation statements or status reports by August 24, 2018. Court Recorder: CS − Roybal Courtroom 640. (ec) (Entered: 07/24/2018)
127 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Further Settlement Conference in this matter for 9/20/2018 10:30 AM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. Counsel may provide an updated confidential settlement conference letter, if desired, by no later than 9/13/2018.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/06/2018)
128 (IN CHAMBERS) SCHEDULING NOTICE: COUNSEL ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, that in light of the present matter set for settlement conference on for 9/24/18, the Status Conference is CONTINUED from 8/13/2018 to 10/1/2018 AT 01:30 PM before Chief Judge Virginia A. Phillips. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (bh) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/10/2018)
129 MINUTES OF Further Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The Court confers with counsel regarding settlement. The Court directs counsel to confer with their expert by no later than September 25, 2018, and to report back to the Court via a joint email sent to chambers email address regarding the status, by no later than seven calendar days subsequent to the conference with the expert. The status report shall contain the information discussed at the conference. The parties may also send, via e−mail, further supplemental mediation statements at that time. Court Recorder: N/A. (ec) (Entered: 09/21/2018)
130 MINUTES OF STATUS CONFERENCE held before Judge Virginia A. Phillips: Matter called. No appearance by counsel as referenced above. The above matter is before the Court on a Status Conference. Counsel for the parties are ordered to show cause in writing within ten (10) days hereof, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to appear this day. Court Reporter: Myra Ponce. (bm) (Entered: 10/01/2018)
131 (IN CHAMBERS) MINUTE ORDER by Judge Virginia A. Phillips: On October 1, 2018 the Court issued an order to show cause why the above action should not be dismissed for failure of counsel to appear at the status conference. The Court having received information from the Magistrate Judge regarding the settlement proceedings finds, good cause exists to discharge. Accordingly, the order to show cause of October 1, 2018, is hereby DISCHARGED. The Court sets a Further Status Conference in the above matter for November 5, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. Counsel responsible for the conduct and trial of the above matter shall appear in person. (bm) (Entered: 10/03/2018)
132 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish scheduling a Further Settlement Conference in this matter for 11/19/18 3:00 PM before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The parties may submit updated confidential settlement conference statements by 11/15/18.THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 11/02/2018)
133 TRANSCRIPT ORDER as to Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D. for Court Reporter. Court will contact Kelsey M.Stricker at kstricker@mofo.com with further instructions regarding this order. Transcript preparation will not begin until payment has been satisfied with the court reporter. (Stricker, Kelsey) (Entered: 11/05/2018)
134 MINUTES OF STATUS CONFERENCE held before Judge Virginia A. Phillips: Matter called. Counsel of record are present as referenced above. Court and counsel

11/16/2018
11/16/2018 11/19/2018
11/20/2018 11/21/2018
11/30/2018 12/06/2018 05/29/2019 08/06/2019

confer regarding status and settlement. Having heard from counsel, Court sets the above matter for Scheduling Conference on November 26, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. Counsel shall file their Rule 26(f) Report by no later than November 20, 2019, setting forth dates in accordance with the Court's "Standing Order" and the "Order Setting Scheduling Conference" that can be found under the Court's policies and procedures on the Court's website. Counsel are advised that the proposed trial date will be set in early 2019. Counsel shall return on date and time specified herein. If the matter settles, counsel shall notify the Court forthwith. Court Reporter: Myra Ponce. (bm) (Entered: 11/08/2018)
135 TRANSCRIPT for proceedings held on 6/28/2018 at 9:04 a.m. Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder: Myra L. Ponce, CSR, RDR, CRR, e−mail address myraponce@sbcglobal.net. Transcript may be viewed at the court public terminal or purchased through the Court Reporter/Electronic Court Recorder before the deadline for Release of Transcript Restriction. After that date it may be obtained through PACER. Notice of Intent to Redact due within 7 days of this date. Redaction Request due 12/7/2018. Redacted Transcript Deadline set for 12/17/2018. Release of Transcript Restriction set for 2/14/2019. (Ponce, Myra) (Entered: 11/16/2018)
136 NOTICE OF FILING TRANSCRIPT filed for proceedings 6/28/2018 at 9:04 a.m. re Transcript 135 THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (Ponce, Myra) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 11/16/2018)
137 MINUTES OF Further Settlement Conference held before Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. The further settlement conference is conducted off the record. The case is called, and appearances are stated for the record. A settlement has been reached, subject to approval by the Pasadena Unified School District School Board, the terms of which are recited on the record, including by reference to Exhibit A. A copy of Exhibit A including changes made during the conference will be e−mailed to counsel. Court Recorder: CS − Roybal Courtroom 640. (ec) (Entered: 11/19/2018)
138 STATUS REPORT Re Settlement filed by Defendants Brian McDonald, Pasadena Unified School District. (Wadlington, Marlon) (Entered: 11/20/2018)
139 MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Virginia A. Phillips: The Court has received the parties' Joint Status Report ( JSR) re: Settlement filed, November 20, 2018. The Court having read and considered the JSR, takes the above scheduling conference off calendar for Monday, November 26, 2018. No appearance by counsel will be necessary. The parties having indicated that they will consent to Judge Standish for the remainder of the post−judgment implementation of the agreement, the parties to complete the necessary form: CV−11, by downloading the form from the Court's website at: www.cacd.uscourts.gov. The parties shall file a "Notice of Lodging" and attach the consent form within ten (10) days hereof. (bm) (Entered: 11/21/2018)
140 NOTICE OF LODGING filed Statement of Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge re Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive − no proceeding held,,, Terminate Deadlines and Hearings,, 139 (Attachments: # 1 Form CV−11D, # 2 Exhibit A)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 11/30/2018)
141 CONSENT TO PROCEED before United States Magistrate Judge by all parties pursuant to GO 12−01 is approved by District Judge Virginia A. Phillips and Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. This case is hereby reassigned to Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish for all further proceedings. Case number will now read 2:16−cv−00984 GJS. (esa) (Entered: 12/06/2018)
142 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Kelsey Marie Stricker counsel for Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. Kelsey M. Stricker is no longer counsel of record for the aforementioned party in this case for the reason indicated in the G−123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiffs Kelsey M. Stricker. (Stricker, Kelsey) (Entered: 05/29/2019)
143 NOTICE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish requiring counsel to file a joint Status Report due by 8/12/2019 regarding settlement. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 08/06/2019)

08/12/2019 08/15/2019
08/19/2019 10/02/2019
10/25/2019
10/31/2019 02/26/2020

144 STATUS REPORT regarding settlement filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 08/12/2019)
145 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Settlement Approval of Minor's Compromise (Unopposed) filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration Candis Bowles, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Declaration Evan Doe, # 4 Declaration Tanya Doe, # 5 Declaration Deborah Doe, # 6 Declaration Eric Doe, # 7 Proposed Order)(Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 08/15/2019)
146 ORDER APPROVING MINOR'S COMPROMISE by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (See order for details) (ec) (Entered: 08/19/2019)
147 Text Only Entry re Order re Minor's Compromise 146 . Counsel shall file a stipulation for dismissal by no later than October 25, 2019. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (ec) TEXT ONLY ENTRY (Entered: 10/02/2019)
148 REQUEST to Dismiss JOINT REQUEST FOR AN ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND ONGOING JURISDICTION OVER ENFORCEMENT OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT filed by Plaintiff D. D.. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order) (Bowles, Candis) (Entered: 10/25/2019)
149 ORDER by Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish: granting 148 Request to Dismiss Case. (MD JS−6. Case Terminated) (ec) (Entered: 10/31/2019)
150 NOTICE of Change of address by Lewis Bossing attorney for Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. Changing attorneys address to Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, 1090 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20005−4900. Filed by Plaintiffs D. D., E D., E. D., S. D., T. D., W. D.. (Bossing, Lewis) (Entered: 02/26/2020)

 
 Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 1 of 31 Page ID #:1

1 CANDIS WATSON BOWLES (CA SBN 198860) MELINDA BIRD (CA SBN 102236)
2 DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA 350 South Bixel Street, Suite 290
3 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: 213.213.8000
4 Facsimile: 213.213.8001

5 ROBERT S. STERN (CA SBN 68240) RStern@mofo.com
6 KELSEY M. STRICKER (CA SBN 300955) KStricker@mofo.com
7 MAYA L. INGRAM (CA SBN 285009) MIngram@mofo.com
8 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard
9 Los Angeles, California 90017-3543 Telephone: 213.892.5200
10 Facsimile: 213.892.5454

11 Attorneys for Plaintiffs (Additional Counsel Listed on Next Page)
12

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

WESTERN DIVISION

16 SAM DOE by and through his guardian Case No. 2:16-CV-00984

ad litem L.R., DEBORAH DOE by and

17 through her guardian ad litem S.H,

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

TANYA DOE by and through her

18 guardian ad litem F.H., ERIC DOE by

and through his guardian ad litem G.B.,

19 WALTER DOE by and through his

guardian ad litem M.F., EVAN DOE by

20 and through his guardian ad litem C.M.;

and on behalf of themselves and other

21 similarly situated students,,

22

Plaintiffs,

23

v.

24 PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and BRIAN MCDONALD
25 in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena Unified School District,
26 Defendants.
27

28

la-1310699

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 2 of 31 Page ID #:2

1 CANDIS WATSON BOWLES (CA SBN 198860) MELINDA BIRD (CA SBN 102236)
2 DISABILITY RIGHTS CALIFORNIA 350 South Bixel Street, Suite 290
3 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: 213.213.8000
4 Facsimile: 213.213.8001

5 ROBERT S. STERN (CA SBN 68240) RStern@mofo.com
6 KELSEY M. STRICKER (CA SBN 300955) KStricker@mofo.com
7 MAYA L. INGRAM (CA SBN 285009) MIngram@mofo.com
8 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 707 Wilshire Boulevard
9 Los Angeles, California 90017-3543 Telephone: 213.892.5200
10 Facsimile: 213.892.5454

11 Attorneys for Plaintiffs (Additional Counsel Listed on Next Page)
12

13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

14

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

15

WESTERN DIVISION

16 SAM DOE by and through his guardian Case No.

ad litem L.R., DEBORAH DOE by and

17 through her guardian ad litem S.H,

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

TANYA DOE by and through her

18 guardian ad litem F.H., ERIC DOE by

and through his guardian ad litem G.B.,

19 WALTER DOE by and through his

guardian ad litem M.F., EVAN DOE by

20 and through his guardian ad litem C.M.;

and on behalf of themselves and other

21 similarly situated students,,

22

Plaintiffs,

23

v.

24 PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and BRIAN MCDONALD
25 in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena Unified School District,
26 Defendants.
27

28

la-1310699

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 3 of 31 Page ID #:3

1 IRA A. BURNIM, Pro Hac Vice Application Pending LEWIS BOSSING (DC SBN 227492)
2 JUDGE DAVID L. BAZELON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH LAW 1101 15th Street NW, Suite 1212
3 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: 202.467.5730
4 Facsimile: 202.223.0409 5 JAMES PREIS (CA SBN 82690)
NISHANTHI KURUKULASURIYA, (CA SBN 302701) 6 MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCACY SERVICES, INC.
3255 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 902 7 Los Angeles, California 90010
Telephone: 213.389.2077 8 Facsimile: 213.389.2595 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

la-1310699

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 4 of 31 Page ID #:4

1

INTRODUCTION

2

1. Defendants Pasadena Unified School District (“Pasadena USD” or

3 “District”) and Brian McDonald, the Superintendent of Pasadena USD, operate a

4 public school system that discriminates against students with behavior-related

5 disabilities. Pasadena USD sends students with these disabilities and only such

6 students to a segregated school site, Focus Point Academy (“Focus Point”), where

7 they are consigned to an inferior education, denied access to electives and

8 extracurricular activities, isolated from their non-disabled peers, deprived of the

9 benefits of normal socialization, and, in general, suffer the same harms as any other

10 victims of segregation. This practice violates the Americans with Disabilities Act

11 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et seq., along with state disability rights laws.

12 Consequently, this court has jurisdiction over this action under Title II of the ADA,

13 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12133, and 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

14

2. Although Pasadena USD considers Focus Point a “therapeutic setting,”

15 it is far from being therapeutic. Placement at Focus Point is more likely to

16 exacerbate a child’s mental health condition than improve it. Academic

17 expectations are low, and students make little academic progress there. Rather than

18 fostering learning, the emphasis at Focus Point is on behavior control using drastic

19 methods including dangerous physical restraints, inappropriate forced isolation,

20 threatened and repeated arrests, and suspensions for minor offenses.

21

3. Tragically, most if not all of the children placed at Focus Point do not

22 need to be there. These are children of great promise. They could be educated

23 successfully in classrooms with students without disabilities in Pasadena USD’s

24 neighborhood schools with reasonable modification of Pasadena USD’s programs

25 and services, namely, the provision of school-based behavioral services there.

26

4. The ADA imposes on Defendants the obligation to reasonably modify

27 Pasadena USD’s programs and services to avoid discrimination. Providing children

28 with a behavior-related disability access to school-based behavioral services—to

la-1310699

1

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 5 of 31 Page ID #:5

1 afford them an equal education and to enable them to be educated in neighborhood

2 schools—is a reasonable modification required by the ADA.

3

5. The ADA mandates that Defendants (i) provide children with a

4 behavior-related disability educational opportunities that are equal to and as

5 effective as those provided other students, and (ii) serve students with a behavior-

6 related disability in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, that is, the

7 setting in which they interact with their peers without a disability to the fullest

8 extent possible. By warehousing students with behavior-related disabilities at

9 Focus Point, Defendants are violating both of the ADA’s legal mandates.

10

6. Plaintiffs seek injunctive and declaratory relief for ongoing violations

11 of the ADA, including an order that Defendants provide the named Plaintiffs and

12 the Plaintiff class with school-based behavioral services in neighborhood schools to

13 afford them an equal education and enable them to be educated in neighborhood

14 schools with their peers without disabilities.

15

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

16

7. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under Title II of the ADA,

17 42 U.S.C. §§ 12131-12133, and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. Declaratory relief is available

18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

19 Injunctive relief is authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 2202 and Rule 65 of the Federal Rules

20 of Civil Procedure.

21

8. Plaintiffs’ claims for violations of California state law concern the

22 same actions and omissions that form the basis of their claims under federal law

23 because they are all part of the same case or controversy. This court has

24 supplemental jurisdiction over those state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367,

25 California Government Code § 11139, and California Civil Code § 54.3.

26

9. Venue is proper in the Central District of California pursuant to 28

27 U.S.C. § 1391(b) (2), because all of the acts and omissions giving rise to these

28 claims occurred in the Central District.

la-1310699

2

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 6 of 31 Page ID #:6

1

PARTIES

2 A. Plaintiffs

3

10. The named Plaintiffs, described in more detail in paragraphs 68

4 through 110 below, all reside in Pasadena and have behavior-related disabilities that

5 impair their ability to learn, read, concentrate, think, and communicate. All are

6 either students at Focus Point or are at serious risk of reassignment to it because

7 Defendants are not providing them the school-based behavioral services they need

8 to be educated in their neighborhood schools.

9

11. In each case, the student’s guardian ad litem brings this action on the

10 student’s behalf.

11

12. All the named Plaintiffs in this matter are minors and have requested

12 leave to proceed in this matter under fictitious names.

13 B. Defendants

14

13. Defendant Pasadena Unified School District (“Pasadena USD”)

15 operates and funds public school programs, services, and activities. Pasadena USD

16 is a public entity as defined by Title II of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12131. Pasadena

17 USD’s offices are located at 351 S. Hudson Ave., Pasadena, California 91101.

18

14. Defendant Brian McDonald is sued in his official capacity as the

19 Superintendent of Pasadena USD. Defendant McDonald is responsible for the daily

20 operations of Pasadena USD, including its programs and services for students with

21 a disability.

22

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

23

15. Pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil

24 Procedure, named Plaintiffs bring this suit as a class action on their own behalf and

25 on behalf of the following class: All Pasadena USD students who, now or in the

26 future, are placed at Focus Point or are at serious risk of being placed at Focus

27 Point. A student is at “serious risk” of being placed at Focus Point if the student

28 (a) is being considered for placement at Focus Point, or (b) has recently been

la-1310699

3

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 7 of 31 Page ID #:7

1 transitioned from Focus Point to a neighborhood school and is having behavior

2 problems at that school.

3

16. The class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.

4 Pasadena USD has reported that, during the 2014-2015 school year, over 80

5 students with a behavior-related disability were enrolled at Focus Point. Joinder is

6 also impracticable because Pasadena USD routinely considers new students for

7 enrollment at Focus Point, and enrolls new children at Focus Point on an ongoing

8 basis. In addition, most class members lack the means to maintain individual

9 actions.

10

17. There are questions of law and fact common to the class, including

11 whether Defendants are discriminating against named Plaintiffs and those similarly

12 situated in violation of the ADA, California Government Code § 11135, and the

13 California Disabled Persons Act, California Civil Code § 54 et seq., by, among

14 other actions, employing policies and practices that:

15

a. Deny named Plaintiffs and members of the class an opportunity

16

to participate in and benefit from educational services that are

17

equal to that afforded students without a behavior-related

18

disability;

19

b. Deny named Plaintiffs and members of the class educational

20

services that are as effective in affording equal opportunity to

21

obtain the same result, gain the same benefit, or reach the same

22

level of achievement as that provided students without a

23

behavior-related disability;

24

c. Fail to provide named Plaintiffs and members of the class

25

educational programs and services in the most integrated setting

26

appropriate, by unnecessarily segregating them at Focus Point;

27

d. Fail to reasonably modify Pasadena USD’s programs and

28

services as needed to avoid discrimination; and

la-1310699

4

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 8 of 31 Page ID #:8

1

e. Utilize methods of administration that have the effect of

2

defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the

3

objectives of Defendants’ educational programs with respect to

4

students with a behavior-related disability.

5

18. The named Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the class.

6

19. The named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of

7 the class. The named Plaintiffs will vigorously represent the interests of the

8 unnamed class members, and all members of the proposed class will benefit from

9 Plaintiffs’ efforts. There is no conflict between the interests of the named Plaintiffs

10 and the proposed class. Furthermore, Plaintiffs have retained competent counsel

11 experienced in educational and class action litigation.

12

20. Defendants have acted and continue to act on grounds generally

13 applicable to the Plaintiff class, thereby making appropriate injunctive and

14 declaratory relief with respect to the class as a whole.

15

THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

16

21. Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42

17 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for

18 the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities and to provide

19 strong and enforceable standards for addressing such discrimination. 42 U.S.C.

20 § 12101(b)(1), (2).

21

22. The ADA is based on Congress’s findings that, inter alia,

22 (i) “historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with

23 disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against

24 individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem,”

25 42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(2), and (ii) “discrimination against individuals with

26 disabilities persists in such critical areas as . . . education,” 42 U.S.C.

27 § 12101(a)(3); and (iii) “individuals with disabilities continually encounter various

28 forms of discrimination, including . . . segregation, and relegation to lesser services,

la-1310699

5

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 9 of 31 Page ID #:9

1 programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities.” 42 U.S.C.

2 § 12101(a)(5).

3

23. The ADA defines a “disability” as “a physical or mental impairment

4 that substantially limits one or more major life activities.” 42 U.S.C.

5 § 12102(1)(A). The ADA provides that for purposes of this definition, “major life

6 activities” include but are not limited to “learning, reading, concentrating, thinking,

7 [and] communicating.” 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A).

8

24. The ADA defines “qualified individual with a disability” as an

9 “individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable modifications to rules,

10 policies, or practices, . . . meets the essential eligibility requirements for the receipt

11 of services or the participation in programs or activities provided by a public

12 entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12131(2).

13

25. As school-age residents of Pasadena, all named Plaintiffs are eligible

14 for educational services provided by the Pasadena USD, and, by virtue of their

15 disabilities, all are qualified for the protections of the ADA.

16

26. Title II of the ADA mandates that “no qualified individual with a

17 disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be

18 denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be

19 subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C. § 12132; see also 28

20 C.F.R. § 35.130.

21

27. Title II of the ADA applies to all of the activities of public entities,

22 including providing education. Each Defendant is either a public entity subject to

23 Title II of the ADA or an official responsible for supervising the operations of a

24 public entity subject to Title II of the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).

25

28. The ADA directs the Attorney General to promulgate regulations

26 enforcing Title II of the ADA and provides guidance on their content. The

27 regulations promulgated by the Attorney General require public entities to “make

28

la-1310699

6

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 10 of 31 Page ID #:10

1 reasonable modifications” to their programs and services “when the modifications

2 are necessary to avoid discrimination.” 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7).

3

29. The regulations also specify that it is unlawful discrimination for a

4 public entity to:

5

a. “Afford a qualified individual with a disability an opportunity to

6

participate in or benefit from the aid, benefit, or service that is

7

not equal to that afforded others,” 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(1)(ii);

8

b. “Provide a qualified individual with a disability with an aid,

9

benefit, or service that is not as effective in affording equal

10

opportunity to obtain the same result, to gain the same benefit,

11

or to reach the same level of achievement as that provided to

12

others,” 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(1)(iii);

13

c. Fail to “administer services, programs, and activities in the most

14

integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified

15

individuals with disabilities,” 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(d), which the

16

Attorney General has defined as “a setting that enables

17

individuals with disabilities to interact with non-disabled

18

persons to the fullest extent possible,” 28 C.F.R. pt. 35, App. A,

19

p. 450; or

20

d. “[U]tilize criteria or methods of administration … [t]hat have

21

the purpose or effect of defeating or substantially impairing

22

accomplishment of the objectives of the public entity’s program

23

with respect to individuals with disabilities,” 28 C.F.R.

24

§ 35.130(b)(3)(ii).

25

30. The Supreme Court has held that discrimination prohibited under Title

26 II of the ADA includes the needless isolation or segregation of persons with

27 disabilities. Olmstead v. L.C., ex rel. Zimring, 527 U.S. 581, 600 (1999)

28 (“unjustified institutional isolation of persons with disabilities is a form of

la-1310699

7

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 11 of 31 Page ID #:11

1 discrimination”); see also 2011 Statement of the US Department of Justice on

2 Enforcement of the Integration Mandate of Title II of the ADA and Olmstead, June

3 22, 2011.

4

31. As the Supreme Court has held in a different context: “We conclude

5 that in the field of public education the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no

6 place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal.” Brown v. Bd. of Ed.

7 of Topeka, Shawnee Cnty., Kan., 347 U.S. 483, 495 (1954).

8

32. Unjustified isolation of disabled persons who, with reasonable

9 accommodations, could participate in an integrated setting is unlawful

10 discrimination because (1) segregation “perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that

11 persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life,”

12 and (2) segregation “severely diminishes life activities of individuals, including

13 family relations, social contacts, work options, economic independence, educational

14 advancement, and cultural enrichment.” Olmstead, 527 U.S. at 600-601.

15

33. Congress specifically provided for a private right of action to enforce

16 Title II. See 42 U.S.C. § 12133 (incorporating the remedies and enforcement

17 procedures available under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which includes a

18 private right of action).

19

STATEMENT OF FACTS

20 A. The Pasadena Unified School District

21

34. Defendant Pasadena USD is a unified school district that is responsible

22 for the schools in the cities of Pasadena, Sierra Madre and the unincorporated

23 community of Altadena. It has approximately 26 neighborhood schools in which

24 students with and without disabilities are enrolled. Enrollment at Focus Point is

25 limited to students with behavior-related disabilities.

26

35. Defendants have not reasonably modified Pasadena USD

27 neighborhood schools to provide school-based behavioral services for children with

28 a behavior-related disability. The essential components of school-based behavioral

la-1310699

8

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 12 of 31 Page ID #:12

1 services are: (a) a comprehensive assessment, including determination of the

2 purpose and triggers for the child’s behavior; (b) an individualized school-based

3 intervention plan that relies on positive support, social skills training, a care

4 coordinator, and adjustments to curriculum or schedule as needed; (c) training for

5 school staff and parents in implementing the plan; and (d) coordination with non-

6 school providers involved with the child (collectively, “school-based behavioral

7 services”).

8

36. There is a professional consensus that such school-based behavioral

9 services are necessary to afford children like named Plaintiffs and Plaintiff class

10 members an equal opportunity to advance academically and graduate and the

11 opportunity to be educated in neighborhood schools along with their non-disabled

12 peers.

13

37. Instead of providing school-based behavioral services in neighborhood

14 schools, Defendants routinely inform students who need them, and their caregivers,

15 that they are only available at Focus Point. The District then transfers these

16 students to Focus Point.

17

38. In addition, students at Pasadena USD schools other than Focus Point

18 have access to a rich array of educational and extracurricular activities. For high

19 school students, this includes a Regional Occupation Program that offers training in

20 high school for careers in health care, entertainment, computer science and video

21 game development and television and video production classes taught through the

22 District's own cable access station. Pasadena USD also offers ROTC, including

23 Naval Cadet training at one high school. Plaintiffs do not have these opportunities

24 at Focus Point.

25

39. For example, John Muir High School is the neighborhood school that

26 named Plaintiffs Sam Doe and Walter Doe would attend if they were not placed at

27 Focus Point. The Muir campus has a swimming pool, separate sports fields for

28 soccer, baseball and football, an auditorium, little theater, business academy, a large

la-1310699

9

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 13 of 31 Page ID #:13

1 library and computer lab, and a building dedicated to auto shop, art rooms and a

2 career training program. Muir has more than 17 clubs and sports activities for

3 students, such as robotics, band, and the school newspaper. Its school literary

4 magazine is supported by the local Rotary club and publishes student poetry,

5 artwork, and fiction. Muir Ranch is an on-site school garden staffed by student

6 farmers that partners with local restaurants, and sells farm boxes and floral

7 bouquets to fund paid student internships. Neither Sam nor Walter can participate

8 in any of these programs and activities while enrolled at Focus Point.

9

40. Similarly, Sierra Madre Middle School is the neighborhood school that

10 named Plaintiff Deborah Doe would attend if she had not been placed at Focus

11 Point. Sierra Madre is a comprehensive campus with classes not only in traditional 12 academic subjects, but also vocal training, drama and robotics. Every 8th grade

13 student at Sierra Madre Middle School has the opportunity to spend a week at a

14 science camp on Catalina Island. Students at Sierra Madre can participate in an

15 annual talent show, art contest, school dances including a winter formal, and school

16 plays such as “the Music Man.” One school group organizes volunteer

17 opportunities for students, such as food drives, spirit day, and neighborhood

18 improvement. Student athletics include flag football, soccer, and basketball.

19 Deborah cannot participate in any of these activities at Focus Point.

20 B. Focus Point – Pasadena USD’s Segregated School

21

41. Focus Point serves first through twelfth grade students (up to age 21)

22 who have behavior-related disabilities. During the 2014-2015 school year,

23 approximately 82 students attended Focus Point, according to Focus Point

24 enrollment logs.

25

42. The students at Focus Point have many talents and strengths. They

26 have the same aspirations as other Pasadena USD students. They have hobbies;

27 enjoy sports, music, and art; and would like to participate in extracurricular

28 activities. After they graduate from high school, they would like to get good jobs.

la-1310699

10

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 14 of 31 Page ID #:14

1 Many would like to go to college. Most have supportive families, guardians, or

2 caregivers.

3

43. The students at Focus Point could be successfully educated in

4 neighborhood schools if provided school-based behavioral services.

5

44. By removing them from neighborhood schools, PUSD needlessly

6 segregates these students from their peers without disabilities

7

45. The isolation of students at Focus Point severely diminishes their

8 educational opportunity. They are denied the same opportunity to learn and

9 graduate that is afforded their peers.

10

46. Their isolation at Focus Point also denies the students opportunities to

11 develop appropriate social skills, including through interacting with their peers

12 without disabilities.

13

47. Moreover, the students at Focus Point are stigmatized as a result of the

14 unwarranted assumption that they are incapable or unworthy of attending their

15 neighborhood schools with their non-disabled peers.

16

48. Once transferred to Focus Point, many students remain there for years

17 even though part of Focus Point’s purported mission is to transition students back

18 to neighborhood schools.

19

49. The few Focus Point students whom Defendants do permit to

20 transition to a neighborhood school from Focus Point are at risk of returning to

21 Focus Point because Defendants fail to provide them the school-based behavioral

22 services they need to be successful in a neighborhood school. If a former student

23 has a crisis that requires additional support, Defendants send the student back to

24 Focus Point, instead of providing the school-based behavioral services the student

25 needs.

26

50. Pasadena USD often tells parents, guardians, or other educational

27 rights holders that students with behavior-related disabilities must be placed at

28 Focus Point or they will fail educationally.

la-1310699

11

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 15 of 31 Page ID #:15

1

Behavior Management

2

51. School-based behavioral services are largely unavailable to children at

3 Focus Point, which does not use effective and professionally accepted practices for

4 managing and improving the behavior of its students. Focus Point uses the same

5 ineffective program for managing and improving the behavior of each of its

6 students, consisting primarily of a points system and the use of restraint and

7 seclusion.

8

52. Because they do not receive school-based behavioral services, Focus

9 Point students at times engage in disruptive behavior. Although District mental

10 health staff and personnel from Pacific Clinics, a private mental health services

11 provider, are on Focus Point’s campus, deescalating students when they engage in

12 disruptive behavior is not part of their responsibilities. Rather, this is left to Focus

13 Point’s inadequately trained school personnel, who often resort to harsh and

14 counterproductive responses, including physical restraints, unnecessary forced

15 isolation, and inappropriate arrests and suspensions for minor offenses. These

16 methods interfere with students’ education and their ability to learn, and tend to

17 exacerbate their mental health symptoms.

18

53. Focus Point uses a point system for earning rewards or to qualify for

19 transfer to another school. A student must earn a certain number of points each day

20 to be considered for transfer to another school. If the student does not earn enough

21 points each day over a 30-day period, the calendar is reset to day one.

22

54. The point system used by Focus Point is not an appropriate

23 intervention for students with behavior-related disabilities, including because it is

24 not individualized to students’ strengths and needs. It is also implemented

25 arbitrarily. A behavior that on one day is acceptable can result in points being

26 withheld on another day. The inconsistent application of the point system

27 contributes to the environment at Focus Point being unpredictable and unstable.

28

la-1310699

12

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 16 of 31 Page ID #:16

1

55. Focus Point staff inappropriately rely on restraint and seclusion to

2 address problematic behaviors. Seclusion takes place in an isolation room, which

3 staff and students call the “boring room.” The “boring room” has no windows and

4 the walls are padded. Focus Point staff frequently use restraints when they place

5 students in the boring room.

6

Academics

7

56. At Focus Point, academic instruction is “dumbed down” and

8 secondary to behavioral control based on the unwarranted assumption that students

9 at Focus Point are incapable of achieving academically at the same level as their

10 peers without a disability.

11

57. Moreover, students from a range of grades are placed in the same

12 classroom, making instruction challenging. Students from 6th-8th grade are mixed

13 together in middle school classrooms, students from 9th-12th grade are mixed

14 together in Focus Point’s high school classrooms. At Focus Point teachers of multi-

15 grade classrooms typically employ one-size-fits-all lesson plans and do not

16 differentiate instruction based on grade level or ability.

17

58. Focus Point requires many students to leave the school at 1:00 p.m. to

18 participate in a non-academic day treatment program at Pacific Clinics from 1:30 to

19 5:30 p.m. Some Focus Point students must attend this program five days per week,

20 others attend two days per week. These students receive far less instructional time

21 per week than other Pasadena USD students, who attend school until 3:00 p.m. each

22 day.

23

59. Focus Point students are not taught the same curriculum provided to

24 their non-disabled peers, or even a comparable curriculum. Focus Point students do

25 not take tests that are the same or comparable to those tests given to their non-

26 disabled peers. They are also not given homework that is the same or comparable

27 to that given non-disabled peers.

28

la-1310699

13

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 17 of 31 Page ID #:17

1

Other Unequal Educational Opportunities

2

60. Focus Point has no extracurricular activities or clubs, and does not

3 offer the elective classes available at Pasadena USD neighborhood schools. Middle

4 and high school students at Focus Point cannot take physical education classes.

5 There are no intermural athletics or student sports teams. Students cannot play

6 interscholastic sports against other schools within Pasadena USD or inter-district

7 sports against teams from other school districts. There is no auditorium, no music

8 or band classes or clubs, and no drama or dance program. There are no school

9 dances. There are no vocational programs nor is there a school garden. There is no

10 ROTC. There are no classes in film, video, visual and fine arts, or graphic design.

11 There is no student government. Students do not have the opportunity to participate

12 in Pasadena USD-sponsored college, military, and job informational and

13 recruitment activities available to students in the neighborhood high schools.

14 Students do not even have access to a lunchroom or cafeteria and must eat lunch in

15 their small classrooms.

16

61. Focus Point requires students who want to return to an integrated

17 campus to participate first in “dual enrollment,” a process that is poorly planned

18 and executed, deprives students of valuable instructional time, and hinders their

19 social integration into the new school. Dual enrollment requires the student to

20 attend one or two classes at a neighborhood school, and then be transported by bus

21 to Focus Point, where they spend the remainder of the day. Dual enrollment is

22 often initiated mid-year, so the Focus Point students start off behind other students

23 in their new classes at the neighborhood school. Teachers at the neighborhood

24 school are typically not involved in planning the students’ transition, nor are they

25 adequately trained or supported to respond to disruptive behavior that may occur at

26 the new school.

27

62. Even after Focus Point staff identifies a student as eligible to transfer

28 to a neighborhood school, District staff may wait months or even years before

la-1310699

14

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 18 of 31 Page ID #:18

1 taking steps to return the student to a neighborhood school. No explanation is

2 given for the delay.

3 C. The Named Plaintiffs

4

Allegations Common to All Named Plaintiffs

5

63. All of the named Plaintiffs attend Focus Point or are at serious risk of

6 attending Focus Point because of Defendants’ policy and practice of failing to

7 provide school-based behavioral services at neighborhood schools.

8

64. While at Focus Point, each of the named Plaintiffs was denied equal

9 educational opportunity and the opportunity to be educated in the most integrated

10 setting appropriate to their needs. Each made little or no educational progress, and

11 their behavior and mental health status deteriorated.

12

65. Each of the named Plaintiffs wants to and could be educated in a

13 neighborhood school if Pasadena USD would reasonably modify its programs and

14 services by providing school-based behavioral services to students with behavior-

15 related disabilities. Each of their guardians ad litem wants them to attend a

16 neighborhood school, which would be the most integrated setting appropriate for

17 them.

18

66. Defendants placed all of the named Plaintiffs at Focus Point on the

19 grounds that they could not be educated in a neighborhood school because they

20 required services that can only be provided at Focus Point. However, the services

21 the named Plaintiffs required could reasonably be provided to the named Plaintiffs

22 at a neighborhood school.

23

67. Each of the named Plaintiffs has suffered serious harms as a result of

24 his or her placement at Focus Point.

25

Plaintiff Sam Doe

26

68. Plaintiff Sam Doe is 14 years old. He is a student in the ninth grade at

27 Focus Point, which he has attended since starting fifth grade in 2011. He lives in

28 Pasadena with his mother, L.R., who is his guardian ad litem and brings this action

la-1310699

15

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 19 of 31 Page ID #:19

1 on his behalf. He is interested in learning about computers and designing video

2 games, and likes to entertain people and make them laugh.

3

69. Sam has a behavior-related disability that impairs his ability to learn,

4 read, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. He

5 has been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder (ADD) and has problems

6 processing new information. He sometimes is verbally defiant to staff and teachers,

7 is aggressive with peers, leaves campus without permission, and is late to or absent

8 from school.

9

70. He attended neighborhood schools in Pasadena USD from first through

10 fifth grade, before the District transferred him to Focus Point. During this time, the

11 District did not provide school-based behavioral services to Sam, and he has

12 continued to have behavior issues in school.

13

71. Sam spent sixth grade at Focus Point. During his seventh grade year,

14 Sam was permitted to dual enroll at a neighborhood middle school in the morning,

15 returning to Focus Point for the afternoon. The District did not prepare Sam to

16 attend his neighborhood school, and did not provide Sam with school-based

17 behavioral services at that school. After several months, the District ended Sam’s

18 dual enrollment, and he returned full-time to Focus Point.

19

72. Sam is now in ninth grade at Focus Point. He has made virtually no

20 academic progress over the last four years. Each year that he is at Focus Point, he

21 falls further behind his non-disabled peers.

22

73. Focus Point has not been successful in improving Sam’s behavior,

23 School staff frequently send Sam to the “boring room” as a punishment for

24 disruptive behavior. In one instance he was sent to the “boring room” at the end of

25 the day and was required to return the next day to finish his punishment.

26

74. Sam has told his counselors that he often “acts out” because he has

27 given up hope of ever being able to leave Focus Point and returning to a

28 neighborhood school.

la-1310699

16

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 20 of 31 Page ID #:20

1

75. With school-based behavioral services, Sam could be educated in a

2 Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

3

Plaintiff Deborah Doe

4

76. Plaintiff Deborah Doe is 11 years old and is in the sixth grade at Focus

5 Point. She has attended Focus Point since February 2012 when she was in the third

6 grade, with a brief break in 2013 when she was temporarily placed outside the

7 school district. She is in foster care and lives at a group foster home in Pasadena.

8 Her aunt, S.H., is her guardian ad litem and brings this action on her behalf. She

9 enjoys dancing, socializing, playing sports and interacting with classmates whether

10 it is on the athletic fields or in the classroom. She is interested in dance, drama, and

11 athletics, and would like to work on a school yearbook.

12

77. Deborah has a behavior-related disability that impairs her ability to

13 learn, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. She

14 has problems with visual processing and controlling her temper and emotions. She

15 has been in foster care since she was very young and experienced trauma at an early

16 age, which has impaired her cognitive and emotional functioning. Her behavioral

17 issues include departures from school and class without permission, immature

18 social relations, physical and verbal aggression to peers, and defiance toward staff.

19 She has difficulty adjusting to change and is easily frustrated when faced with new

20 or challenging tasks.

21

78. When she was in second grade and attended a neighborhood school,

22 Deborah was reading at grade level and was close to grade level in other areas.

23 Focus Point has failed to help her to make progress academically. She wants to

24 attend a Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

25

79. The District placed Deborah in dual enrollment at a neighborhood

26 middle school for fifth grade. However, Deborah was not provided with school-

27 based behavioral services at the middle school, and she was not successful in dual

28 enrollment. She returned to full-time enrollment at Focus Point in early 2015.

la-1310699

17

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 21 of 31 Page ID #:21

1

80. The District has again placed Deborah in dual enrollment at a

2 neighborhood middle school in January 2016. This transition has not been well

3 planned; Deborah only attends one class at the middle school—physical

4 education—and loses valuable instructional time riding the school bus back and

5 forth between Focus Point and the middle school each day. Because she does not

6 receive school-based behavioral services, and she continues to have disability-

7 related behaviors, she is at serious risk of returning to Focus Point. The District

8 does not have a plan for responding to her disability-related behaviors other than by

9 returning Deborah to Focus Point.

10

81. At Focus Point, when Deborah has become defiant or aggressive with

11 peers, she has been restrained and sent to the “boring room” as punishment.

12

82. With school-based behavioral services, Deborah could be educated in

13 a Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

14

Plaintiff Tanya Doe

15

83. Plaintiff Tanya Doe is 12 years old and in the sixth grade. She

16 attended Focus Point from June 2013, when she was finishing the third grade, to

17 October 23, 2015. Tanya is in foster care and lives in a group home in Pasadena.

18 Her court-appointed special advocate, F.H., is her guardian ad litem and brings this

19 action on her behalf. Tanya enjoys drawing and arts and crafts projects that involve

20 working with her hands and putting things together. She likes music. She is

21 articulate, with a strong ability to communicate verbally. She has clear plans for

22 the future: she wants to live in a foster family and have a dog, and to spend more

23 time with her siblings, who are also in foster care.

24

84. Tanya has a behavior-related disability that impairs her ability to learn,

25 read, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. She

26 has a history of trauma and loss as a result of frequent moves while in foster care

27 and being separated from her four siblings. Her behaviors have included leaving

28 classes without permission and walking away from campus, physical and verbal

la-1310699

18

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 22 of 31 Page ID #:22

1 aggression toward staff, and tantrums in class. She has difficulty controlling her

2 anger and sadness when she is teased, and has difficulty completing school work.

3

85. Tanya attended neighborhood schools from first through third grade.

4 In January 2013, Tanya moved to the group home where she currently lives and

5 enrolled in a Pasadena USD neighborhood elementary school, where she had

6 serious behavior issues. The District did not provide her with school-based

7 behavioral services at her neighborhood school. Instead, the District reduced her

8 schedule to a half day.

9

86. In June 2013, the District transferred Tanya to Focus Point. At Focus

10 Point, Tanya has had virtually no opportunity to learn or practice social skills. Staff

11 has tried to control her behavior through use of dangerous restraints and placement

12 in the “boring room.” In one instance, Tanya received a black eye while staff

13 restrained her. She feels that people at Focus Point do not listen to her. Tanya

14 made almost no academic progress while at Focus Point.

15

87. Through advocacy by Tanya’s guardian ad litem, Tanya finally was

16 able to transfer to McKinley Middle School on October 23, 2015, after attending

17 fourth and fifth grade at Focus Point.

18

88. Tanya is at serious risk of returning to Focus Point. The District did

19 not plan for her transition, and she has not been provided school-based behavioral

20 services at McKinley. As a result, she is having behavior issues at the school.

21 Recently she walked away from the school campus. She was found by group home

22 staff walking around downtown Pasadena. Defendants do not have a plan for

23 responding to her behavior issues at school other than by returning Tanya to Focus

24 Point.

25

89. With school-based behavioral services, Tanya could be educated in a

26 Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

27

28

la-1310699

19

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 23 of 31 Page ID #:23

1

Plaintiff Eric Doe

2

90. Plaintiff Eric Doe is 11 years old and in the sixth grade at a

3 neighborhood middle school in Pasadena USD. He attended fifth grade at Focus

4 Point. He lives in Pasadena with his great aunt, G.B., who is his guardian ad litem

5 and brings this action on his behalf. Eric is an intelligent and precocious young

6 man. He enjoys learning, reading, and riding his scooter, but his passion is

7 basketball. He is interested in working in the sports industry or in television as a

8 newscaster.

9

91. Eric has a behavior-related disability that impairs his ability to learn,

10 read, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. He

11 has been diagnosed with Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD),

12 mood disorder and anxiety disorder among other conditions. He experienced early

13 trauma in his life, and was separated from his siblings. His behaviors include

14 defiance, difficulty controlling his anger, and leaving class when he wants to avoid

15 a task.

16

92. Despite being intellectually capable, Eric has struggled academically

17 because of his disability, particularly with writing. His frustration with writing

18 often leads to behavior outbursts. On occasion, Eric has fought with peers over

19 disagreements or when provoked. Rather than deescalating his behavior or using

20 positive behavior interventions, Focus Point staff restrained Eric and took him to

21 “the boring room.”

22

93. As a result of Eric’s great-aunt and guardian ad litem’s persistent

23 advocacy, Eric was allowed to begin dual enrollment, with two class periods at the

24 District’s Marshall Fundamental School and his other classes at Focus Point. Soon

25 after, Eric began full-time enrollment at Marshall, where he has joined the

26 basketball team. He plays basketball at recess and participates in P.E. classes.

27

94. Eric continues to have disability-related behaviors. He is not receiving

28 school-based behavioral services and is at serious risk of returning to Focus Point.

la-1310699

20

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 24 of 31 Page ID #:24

1 Defendants do not have a plan for responding to his disability-related behaviors

2 other than by returning Eric to Focus Point.

3

95. With school-based behavioral services, Eric could be educated in a

4 Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

5

Plaintiff Walter Doe

6

96. Plaintiff Walter Doe is seventeen years old and in the twelfth grade at

7 Focus Point. He lives with his parents in Pasadena. His mother, M.F., is his

8 guardian ad litem and brings this action on his behalf. Walter is very charismatic.

9 He is also thoughtful, creative and technologically savvy. He frequently uses his

10 cell phone to make videos, and is interested in learning about video production. He

11 aspires to be a stage and concert lighting technician.

12

97. Walter has a behavior-related disability that impairs his ability to learn,

13 read, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. He

14 has been diagnosed with depression, a generalized anxiety disorder, and a specific

15 learning disability, among other conditions. He has engaged in self-injurious and

16 disruptive behavior. He has had difficulty completing work, is frequently absent or

17 tardy without excuse, and has been defiant toward teaching staff.

18

98. Walter has struggled academically since kindergarten as a result of his

19 disability. The District never provided him with school-based behavioral services.

20 After repeated problems in neighborhood schools, it transferred Walter to Focus

21 Point for eleventh grade.

22

99. After two years at Focus Point, Walter’s behaviors have not improved.

23 He continues to be sent to the “boring room” when he is defiant with staff. At

24 times, being sent there has caused his behavior to escalate. Walter is frustrated and

25 angry about being unable to transfer from Focus Point to a neighborhood high

26 school.

27

100. With school-based behavioral services, Walter could be educated in a

28 Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

la-1310699

21

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 25 of 31 Page ID #:25

1

Plaintiff Evan Doe

2

101. Plaintiff Evan Doe is 14 years old and in the ninth grade at Focus

3 Point, which he has attended since May 2015. He lives with his mother, C.M., who

4 is his guardian ad litem and brings this action on his behalf. Evan is close with his

5 family and siblings, and loves sports and athletics. When he attended a

6 neighborhood school, he enjoyed physical education and sports, including playing

7 soccer and basketball at lunch with other students. This helped him to focus in his

8 classes.

9

102. Evan has a behavior-related disability that impairs his ability to learn,

10 read, concentrate, think, communicate, or develop and maintain relationships. He

11 has been diagnosed with anxiety and ADHD, among other conditions. Evan’s

12 behaviors include talking out of turn in class, using inappropriate language, leaving

13 classes or arriving late to classes that are challenging for him, verbal aggression,

14 and physical aggression to peers.

15

103. Although Evan is only 14 years old, he is 6’3” tall and over 200

16 pounds. Evan is able to concentrate better and perform better academically when

17 he has opportunities for physical activity throughout the school day, including P.E.

18 class, recreation at recess and lunch, and organized sports.

19

104. As a result of Evan’s increasing behavior problems, the District

20 transferred him to Focus Point for the ninth grade.

21

105. At Focus Point, Evan does not have the opportunity to attend a

22 physical education class. The campus does not have a field or track on which

23 students can run and play to release extra energy and anxiety. Students have

24 limited opportunities to engage in play and recreation. Evan would like to play

25 interscholastic sports, especially basketball, but such activities are not offered at

26 Focus Point.

27

28

la-1310699

22

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 26 of 31 Page ID #:26

1

106. Evan has observed other students being restrained and dragged into the

2 the “boring room” at Focus Point, which Evan calls “the padded room.” He is

3 worried about being forced into the “padded room” himself.

4

107. In October 2015, Defendants let Evan participate in Focus Point’s dual

5 enrollment program. He began attending Pasadena High School one month after

6 the classes had begun. He spent mornings at Pasadena High School and afternoons

7 at Focus Point. His mid-day bus trip disrupted his school day.

8

108. Pasadena USD did not provide Evan school-based behavioral services

9 at Pasadena High School and, as a result, he was not successful there. After 10

10 weeks, the District ended Evan’s dual enrollment and sent him back full-time to

11 Focus Point.

12

109. Placement at Focus Point has not been effective in improving Evan’s

13 behavior in school. To the contrary, it has eroded his self-esteem and exacerbated

14 his disability-related behaviors. Evan wants to return to Pasadena High School

15 including because he feels stigmatized at Focus Point.

16

110. With school-based behavioral services, Evan could be educated in a

17 Pasadena USD neighborhood school.

18 D. The Plaintiff Class

19

111. These named Plaintiffs are not alone in their experiences in Pasadena

20 USD and at Focus Point. Their experiences are endured by the scores of students

21 with a behavior-related disability in the proposed Plaintiff class. These students

22 suffer the same injuries and require the same relief as the named Plaintiffs.

23

112. The proposed class consists of: “All Pasadena USD students who,

24 now or in the future, are placed at Focus Point or are at serious risk of being placed

25 at Focus Point.” A student is at “serious risk” of being placed at Focus Point if the

26 student (a) is being considered for placement at Focus Point, or (b) has been

27 recently transitioned from Focus Point to a neighborhood school and is having

28 behavior problems at school.

la-1310699

23

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 27 of 31 Page ID #:27

1

113. Defendants have failed to reasonably modify Pasadena USD’s

2 programs and services to provide the named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class with

3 the school-based behavioral services they need to enjoy an equal education and to

4 be educated in Pasadena USD neighborhood schools.

5

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF

6

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

42 U.S.C. § 12132

7

8

114. Plaintiffs re-allege the allegations in all preceding paragraphs as

9 though fully set forth herein.

10

115. Named Plaintiffs and members of the Plaintiff class are individuals

11 with a disability within the meaning of the ADA. Their disabilities substantially

12 limit one or more major life activities, including learning, reading, concentrating,

13 thinking, communicating, or developing and maintaining relationships.

14

116. As school-age children who live in the District, they are qualified to

15 participate in Defendants’ educational programs and services. 42 U.S.C.

16 § 12131(2).

17

117. Defendant Pasadena USD is a public entity within the meaning of the

18 ADA. Defendant MacDonald is an official responsible for running this public

19 entity and supervising its operations. 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).

20

118. Through the acts and omissions described above, Defendants are

21 violating the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, by:

22

a. Denying named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class an opportunity

23

to participate in and benefit from educational services that is

24

equal to that afforded other students;

25

b. Denying named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class educational

26

services that are as effective in affording equal opportunity to

27

obtain the same result, gain the same benefit, or reach the same

28

level of achievement as that provided other students;

la-1310699

24

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 28 of 31 Page ID #:28

1

c. Denying named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class the opportunity

2

to receive educational programs and services in the most

3

integrated setting appropriate to their needs;

4

d. Failing to reasonably modify Pasadena USD’s programs and

5

services as needed to avoid discrimination against named

6

Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class; and

7

e. Utilizing methods of administration that have the effect of

8

defeating or substantially impairing the accomplishment of the

9

objectives of Defendants’ educational programs with respect to

10

named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class.

11

119. Granting relief to Plaintiffs would not fundamentally alter Defendants’

12 programs, services, and activities.

13

120. The acts and omissions of Defendants have caused and will continue to

14 cause named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class to suffer irreparable harm, and they

15 have no adequate remedy at law.

16

121. Under the ADA, Plaintiffs are entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs as

17 appropriate and permitted by law, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205.

18

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF

19

CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE § 11135

20

21

122. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained

22 in the foregoing paragraphs.

23

123. Section 11135(a) of the California Government Code provides in

24 pertinent part: "No person in the State of California shall, on the basis of . . .

25 disability, be unlawfully denied the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to

26 discrimination under, any program or activity that is funded directly by the state or

27 receives any financial assistance from the state.”

28

la-1310699

25

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 29 of 31 Page ID #:29

1

124. Pasadena USD is a public agency that receives financial assistance

2 from the State of California.

3

125. Through their acts and omissions described herein, Defendants are

4 violating California Government Code § 11135 by unlawfully denying Plaintiffs

5 and the Plaintiff class the benefits of, and unlawfully subjecting them to

6 discrimination under, Defendants’ educational programs and activities.

7

126. Defendants’ actions have caused and will continue to cause named

8 Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class to suffer irreparable harm, and they have no

9 adequate remedy at law. Because Defendants’ discriminatory conduct is ongoing,

10 declaratory and injunctive relief are appropriate remedies.

11

127. Plaintiffs and Class Members are also entitled to reasonable attorneys’

12 fees and costs in filing this action.

13

COUNT III

VIOLATION OF DISABLED PERSONS ACT,

14

CALIFORNIA CIVIL CODE § 54 ET SEQ.

15

16

128. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference each and every allegation contained

17 in the foregoing paragraphs.

18

129. Through the acts and omissions described herein, Defendants are

19 violating California Civil Code § 54, which provides that “[i]ndividuals with

20 disabilities or medical conditions have the same rights as the general public to the

21 full and free use of . . . public facilities.”

22

130. Under California Civil Code § 54(c), a violation of the ADA also

23 constitutes a violation of California Civil Code §§ 54 et seq.

24

131. Plaintiffs and Class Members are persons with disabilities within the

25 meaning of California Civil Code § 54(b)(1).

26

132. Pasadena USD provides public facilities, within the meaning of

27 California Civil Code §§ 54 et seq.

28

la-1310699

26

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 30 of 31 Page ID #:30

1

133. By the acts and omissions described herein, Defendants are violating

2 California Civil Code § 54.

3

134. Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff Class are entitled to recover reasonable

4 attorneys’ fees and costs in an action to enforce California Civil Code §§ 54.3(a),

5 55.

6

135. Defendants’ actions have caused and will continue to cause named

7 Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class to suffer irreparable harm, and they have no

8 adequate remedy at law. Because Defendants’ discriminatory conduct is ongoing,

9 declaratory and injunctive reliefs are appropriate remedies.

10

RELIEF REQUESTED

11

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray that the Court grant the following relief:

12

A. Order that Plaintiffs may maintain this action as a class action pursuant

13 to Rule 23(b) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

14

B. Order and declare that Defendants are violating the rights of the named

15 Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class under the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq.,

16 California Government Code § 11135, and California Civil Code §§ 54 et seq.

17

C. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendants, their successors in

18 office, agents, employees and assigns, and all persons acting in concert with them

19 to provide named Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff class with the school-based behavioral

20 services they need to enjoy an equal education and to receive educational programs

21 and services in the most integrated setting, as required by Title II of the ADA.

22

D. Award Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees and costs as appropriate and

23 permitted by law, including pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205.

24

E. Any other relief as this Court finds just and proper.

25

26

27

28

la-1310699

27

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:16-cv-00984-BRO-GJS Document 1 Filed 02/11/16 Page 31 of 31 Page ID #:31

1 Dated: February 11, 2016 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
la-1310699

MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
By: /s/ Robert S. Stern Robert S. Stern Attorneys for Plaintiffs Sam Doe, Deborah Doe, Tanya Doe, Eric Doe, Walter Doe, and Evan Doe

28

CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

 
 Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 1 of 14 Page ID #:1535

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

WESTERN DIVISION

11 12

SadAlMiteDmOLE.Rb.y, DanEdBtOhrRoAugHhDhiOs Egubayrdainadn through her guardian ad litem S.H,

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS CLASS ACTION

13

TganuAdaNrtdhYiraAonuDgahdOhlEiitsebmgyuaFanr.Hddi.ta,hnEroRaudIgChlitDheemOrEGb.By.,

[PROPOSED] ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND RETAINING

14 15

WguAarLdTiaEnRaDd OlitEembyMa.nFd.,tEhrVoAugNh

his DOE

by

and through his guardian ad litem C.M.;

JURISDICTION Judge: Hon. Magistrate Standish

and on behalf of themselves and other Complaint: Filed February 16, 2016

16 similarly situated students,

17

Plaintiffs,

18

v.

19 PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and BRIAN MCDONALD
20 in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena Unified School District,
21
Defendants.
22

23

24

25

26

27

28

005510.0033125347 486.1

3

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 2 of 14 Page ID #:1536

1

The Court has read and considered the parties joint request for dismissal under

2 Rule 41(a)(2), the settlement agreement and the Court’s Order Approving Minor’s

3 Compromise. Docket ## 145-2 and 146). The Court finds that dismissal of the action

4 with prejudice is proper under the following terms:

5

(1) The District Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the Parties’ Settlement

6

Agreement, including without limitation disputes over Defendants’

7

compliance with the terms thereof, compliance with and implementation of

8

the Strategic Plan and any and all timelines applicable to executing the

9

Settlement Agreement.

10

(2) The Settlement Agreement set forth below is incorporated into the order to

11

retain the Court’s jurisdiction to enforce the terms therein. Kokkonen v.

12

Guardian Life Ins. Co. of America, 511 U.S. 375, 380-81 (1994).

13

14

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

15 This Settlement Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “Agreement”) is made and

16 entered into, by and between the PASADENA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT and

17 BRIAN MCDONALD (“DISTRICT or DEFENDANTS”) and SAM DOE by and

18 through his guardian ad litem L.R., DEBORAH DOE by and through her guardian

19 ad litem S.H., TANYA DOE by and through her guardian ad litem F.H., ERIC DOE

20 by and through his guardian ad litem G.B., WALTER DOE by and through his

21 guardian ad litem M.F., and EVAN DOE by and through his guardian ad litem C.M.,

22 (“PLAINTIFFS”) (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties”).

23

I.

24

GENERAL RECITALS

25 This Agreement is made for the following purposes and with reference to the

26 following facts:

27

28

005510.0033125347 486.1

4

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 3 of 14 Page ID #:1537

1 1.1 ACTION

2 There is now pending in the United States District Court, Central District of

3 California, Case No. 2:16-cv-00984-VAP (GJSx) entitled SAM DOE by and through

4 his guardian ad litem L.R., DEBORAH DOE by and through her guardian ad litem

5 S.H., TANYA DOE by and through her guardian ad litem F.H., ERIC DOE by and

6 through his guardian ad litem G.B., WALTER DOE by and through his guardian ad

7 litem M.F., EVAN DOE by and through his guardian ad litem C.M.; and on behalf

8 of themselves and other similarly situated students v. Pasadena Unified School

9 District and Brian McDonald in his official capacity as Superintendent of Pasadena

10 Unified School District (hereinafter referred to as the “Action”).

11 1.2 PURPOSE

12

The purpose of this Agreement is to resolve the claims in this litigation and to

13 improve services for special education students with behavior-related disabilities in

14 Pasadena Unified School District (“PUSD”) consistent with the recommendation of

15 the Neutral Expert as specified in Section II below.

16

By and through this Agreement the Parties hereby settle and compromise all

17 disputes and controversies, claims and causes of action that were raised, or could

18 have been raised, by the Parties in the Action including, the Individuals with

19 Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act

20 (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq., Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973

21 (“Section 504”), the Unruh Civil Rights Act, California Civil Code Section 51

22 (“Unruh Act”), California Government Code § 11135, and 20 U.S.C. § 1415 et seq

23 up to the date of execution of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not in any way

24 be construed as an admission by any party that it has acted wrongfully with respect

25 to the other party or any other related person or entity, or that any party has any rights

26 whatsoever against any other party.

27 No Other Actions. The Plaintiffs covenant and represent that they have not filed

28 any complaints or charges or lawsuits against the District with any governmental

005510.0033125347 486.1

5

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 4 of 14 Page ID #:1538

1 agency or court, except this ACTION, and that the Plaintiffs will not do so at any

2 time during the monitoring period specified in Section 2.1(h) with respect to the

3 matters released under this Agreement.

4

Subject to the adherence to the terms of this Agreement, and upon receipt of

5 the monetary component of the settlement referenced above, Plaintiffs will dismiss

6 this ACTION with prejudice and will not seek costs or fees through the Court other

7 than those that are already specified by this Agreement. As further consideration for

8 this Agreement, it is the express and understood intent, purpose, desire, and

9 agreement of the Parties that the Plaintiffs, and the District shall, and hereby do,

10 release and forever discharge each other, as well as their respective agents, officers,

11 employees, attorneys, and representatives, of and from any and all claims, demands,

12 actions or causes of action of every kind and character, known or unknown, which

13 they may now have in connection with, relating to, or arising out of any and all

14 existing disputes between the Parties through the date of execution of this Agreement.

15

The Plaintiffs and the District specifically waives the provisions of Section

16 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows:

17 Section 1542. Certain claims not affected by general release. A general release

18 does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in

19 his or her favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him or

20 her must have materially affected his or her settlement with the debtor.

21

The Parties expressly waive and release any right or benefit which they have

22 or may have under Section 1542 of the Civil Code of the State of California against

23 the District, to the fullest extent that they may waive all such rights and benefits

24 pertaining to the matters released in this Agreement. In connection with this waiver,

25 the Parties acknowledge that they are aware that they may in the future discover

26 claims presently unknown or unsuspected, or facts in addition to or different from

27 those which they now know or believe to be true, regarding the matters released in

28 this Agreement. Nevertheless, it is the Parties intention, through this Agreement, and

005510.0033125347 486.1

6

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 5 of 14 Page ID #:1539

1 with the advice of counsel, to fully, finally and forever settle and release all such

2 matters. This release shall be and remain in effect as a full and complete release of

3 all claims that they may now have in connection with, relating to, or arising out of

4 any and all existing disputes between the Parties notwithstanding the discovery or

5 existence of any such additional or different claims or facts relative to those matters.

6

7

II.

OBLIGATIONS

8

2.1 PROGRAM EVALUATION, STRATEGIC PLAN, TIMELINE FOR

9

ACTIVITIES, INDICATORS, BENCHMARKS, AND

10

IMPLEMENTATION

11

(a) The Parties agree that Lauren Katzman of Urban Collaborative

12 (“Neutral Expert”) and her designated review team will conduct a district-wide

13 evaluation of the District’s programs, services, and supports pertaining to the

14 provision of services to students with behavior-related disabilities, within six months

15 after the Neutral Expert confirms her availability to begin the assessment. The

16 Neutral Expert will conduct an evaluation to review the District’s programs, policies

17 and practices to determine the District’s capacity, resources, and needs in the

18 following areas, as set forth in detail in the attached Appendix:

19

1. Inclusion of special education students with behavior and mental

20

health disabilities;

21

2. Transition of students from segregated settings, including but not

22

limited to Focus Point Academy, to general education campuses;

23

3. Early response to behaviors and academic support to prevent

24

behavior problems;

25

4. Support for multi-system involved youth;

26

5. Inclusion of named plaintiffs; and

27

6. Inclusion of Focus Point Academy students.

28

005510.0033125347 486.1

7

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 6 of 14 Page ID #:1540

1

(b) PUSD shall bear all costs to retain the Neutral Expert for the evaluation and

2

monitoring required by this Agreement. PUSD shall provide Plaintiffs’

3

Counsel with a copy of the proposed contract with the Neutral Expert, and

4

shall allow Plaintiffs’ Counsel to comment and provide any requested

5

modifications prior to executing the proposed contract.

6
(c) To the extent it deems necessary, PUSD shall seek a protective order to
7
permit the Neutral Expert to review individual student records as specified
8
below.
9

10
(d) The Parties agree that the Neutral Expert will be permitted access to
11
District information as follows:
12
1. Interviews and focus groups with District staff, school staff, students,
13
parents, educational rights holders, guardians, Plaintiffs’ counsel,
14
and Defendants’ counsel;
15
2. Observations at existing and proposed inclusion sites, including but
16
not limited to Focus Point Academy, Franklin Elementary School,
17
McKinley Middle School, and Pasadena High School;
18
3. District policies, guidelines, processes and procedures;
19
4. Student-level district data, including classification rates, placement
20
in educational environments, and educational outcomes;
21
5. Individual student files, including evaluation data, Individualized
22
Education Program (IEP) plans, functional behavioral assessments,
23
behavior intervention plans, discipline records, attendance records;
24
6. Information on potential community partners.
25
(e) The Parties agree that the review by the Neutral Expert will include
26
analyses of:
27
1. Assessment of staffing, training, and the academic and behavioral
28

005510.0033125347 486.1

8

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 7 of 14 Page ID #:1541

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
005510.0033125347 486.1

interventions needed to include special education students with

behavior-related disabilities in general education classrooms on

comprehensive campuses within the District;

2. Review and assessment of the District’s current and proposed

inclusion sites;

3. Assessment of protocol for transitioning students from self-

contained settings for students with behavior-related disabilities to

general education classrooms, including staff training, and the

academic and behavioral interventions at general education

campuses;

4. Assessment of programs and staff training on early response to

behaviors, comprehensive behavior assessments, implementation of

positive behavior intervention plans, implementation of trauma-

informed care and approaches to promoting learning while

addressing behaviors;

5. Assessment of the District’s caregiver engagement process and

capacity for building community partnerships that would help the

District meet the needs of students with disabilities including foster

youth;

6. Consultation with the District’s staff regarding the placements of

each named Plaintiff while in PUSD, and how the ultimate

recommendations of the Neutral Expert could support inclusion of

these students and can support inclusion of similarly situated

students in general education classrooms at the District’s

comprehensive campuses; and

7. Review of student records to determine an appropriate transition

protocol for all current Focus Point Academy students and all other

students transitioning from separate schools to general education

9

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 8 of 14 Page ID #:1542

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
005510.0033125347 486.1

classrooms in comprehensive campuses

(f) The Parties agree that the Neutral Expert will participate in monthly telephone conferences with the Parties and their counsel to report on progress while the Expert is conducting the evaluation. The Parties will answer questions and provide feedback to ensure that the program evaluation is addressing concerns raised in the Plaintiffs’ complaint. At the conclusion of the evaluation period, the Neutral Expert will complete a Program Evaluation Report that will include a description of all evaluation tools (e.g., documents reviewed, interviews, site visits, and observations), baseline data, findings, and recommendations, including: 1. The identification of systemic best practices and inconsistencies related to the provision of special education services to students with IEPs; 2. Approaches to improving the educational infrastructure for special education students with behavior-related disabilities, including evaluation procedures, service delivery, programmatic structures, and placement determinations; 3. A proposed Strategic Plan and Activity Timeline to implement the recommendations; and 4. Proposed indicators and improvement benchmarks regarding special education students with behavior-related disabilities, including: • Increases in inclusive education (time spent by students with behavior-related disabilities in classrooms with students without disabilities); • Improved academic outcomes: • Improved Social Emotional Learning, including decreases in rates of suspension, expulsion, restraint, and seclusion/time-outs.

10

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 9 of 14 Page ID #:1543

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
005510.0033125347 486.1

(g) Within thirty (30) days after the Parties receive the completed Program

Evaluation Report, the Parties will meet and confer in writing to determine

which recommendations and elements of the Strategic Plan the Parties

agree that the District will implement. If the Parties cannot reach an

agreement on the recommendations and elements of the Strategic Plan that

will be implemented by the District, the Parties will resolve their

disagreement pursuant to the dispute resolution procedure in Section 2.4

(ii) and (iii). Following resolution of any disputes, District agrees promptly

to adopt and begin implementation of the Strategic Plan and Activity

Timeline, as agreed upon or determined by the arbitrator

(h) The Neutral Expert will monitor implementation of the Strategic Plan,

Timelines and Performance Metrics for a period of five (5) years. The

Expert will have access to the information identified in paragraph 2.1(b)

above during this time and will work with the District in the first year to

develop a data collection system for the monitoring period. The District

agrees to provide the Neutral Expert and Plaintiffs’ counsel with quarterly

written reports, including updates on agreed upon data elements, and with

other information requested by the Neutral Expert. The District will

conduct remote meetings with Neutral Expert, District staff and counsel for

the Parties on a quarterly basis to review evidence of implementation. The

Neutral Expert will conduct in-person meetings with District staff and

counsel for the Parties to review and report on implementation on an annual

basis. Plaintiffs’ counsel may make no more than two (2) site visits per

school year during the five (5) years to PUSD schools, with at least seven

(7) days notice to Defendants and their counsel. The Court shall retain

jurisdiction of this matter during the full course of the monitoring period.

(i) The Strategic Plan, as agreed upon between the Parties, or subject to

resolution of disputes as outlined in section 2.4, including all timelines and

11

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 10 of 14 Page ID #:1544

1

benchmarks, shall be updated annually and amended as Defendants deem

2

necessary for effective implementation, subject to the approval of the

3

Neutral Expert and provided that notice of such change is provided to

4

Plaintiffs in writing. In the event Plaintiffs disagree with Defendants’

5

proposed update or amendment, Plaintiffs shall notify Defendants in

6

writing of their disagreement and may pursue dispute resolution pursuant

7

to Section 2.4 below.

8

(j) The Strategic Plan, including all timelines and benchmarks, and all

9

amendments or updates thereto, shall be incorporated into, and become

10

enforceable as part of the Settlement Agreement.

11 2.2 PLAINTIFFS’ AWARD AND ATTORNEY’S FEES

12

(a) The Defendants will pay to the Plaintiffs’ counsel, on behalf of

13 Plaintiffs, the lump sum of $8,500 each in full, final and complete settlement of

14 claims by the Plaintiffs for compensatory damages. No Plaintiff will be entitled to

15 any other payment for monetary damages as compensation for the claims that were

16 alleged or could have been alleged in the Action. Defendants agree to pay the agreed

17 upon lump sum amount to Plaintiffs, via their counsel subject to the Court’s approval

18 and the approval of an Order for Minor’s Compromise.

19

(b) The Defendants will pay to the Plaintiffs’ counsel, Disability Rights

20 California, Mental Health Advocacy Services, Judge David L Bazelon Center for

21 Mental Health Law and Morrison and Foerster LLP, a lump sum of $425,000 in full,

22 final and complete settlement of all claims by the Plaintiffs or their attorneys for

23 attorneys’ fees and litigation costs up to and including the date of this agreement. It

24 will be the sole obligation of the Plaintiffs and their counsel to allocate and apportion

25 that sum between attorneys’ fees and litigation costs as they see fit.

26

(c) The payments specified in Sections 2.2. (b) of the Agreement will be

27 due and owing to the Plaintiffs and their counsel in five equal payments over a period

28 of five years from the date upon which the Agreement is formally approved by the

005510.0033125347 486.1

12

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 11 of 14 Page ID #:1545

1 Court. The first payment shall be due 30 days after the Agreement is approved and

2 subsequent payments hall be due in one year intervals. The schedule of payments

3 shall include payment of interest at a rate pursuant to Government Code section 4 970.1(c).1

5

(d) Payment drafts specified in 2.2.(a) and (b) will be made payable to

6 Disability Rights California and will be delivered to 1831 K Street, Sacramento,

7 California 95811-4114 for appropriate distribution. Plaintiffs’ Counsel will notify

8 Defendants’ counsel when payment has been received within a reasonable time of

9 receipt.

10

11 2.3 DISMISSAL AND ENFORCEMENT

12

(a) Within ten (10) days of execution of the Agreement, the Parties agree to

13 file a joint request for an order of dismissal that includes, but is not limited to, the

14 following provisions:

15

i) The District Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the Parties’

16

Settlement Agreement, including without limitation disputes over

17

Defendants’ compliance with the terms thereof, compliance with and

18

implementation of the Strategic Plan and any and all timelines applicable

19

to executing the Settlement Agreement;

20

ii) The Settlement Agreement shall be incorporated into the dismissal order.

21 2.4 DISPUTE RESOLUTION

22

(a) Plaintiffs’ counsel shall have standing to enforce the terms of this

23

Agreement during the term of the Agreement.

24

25

26

1 Government Code section 970.1(c) provides that “unless another statute provides a different

interest rate, interest on a tax or fee judgment against a local public entity shall accrue at a rate equal to the
27 weekly average one year constant maturity United States Treasury yield at the time of the judgment plus 2

percent, but shall not exceed 7 percent per annum.”
28

005510.0033125347 486.1

13

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 12 of 14 Page ID #:1546

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
005510.0033125347 486.1

(b) All disputes concerning the interpretation, implementation, monitoring of and compliance with this Agreement and with the development, implementation, modification, monitoring of and compliance with the Strategic Plan shall be resolved as follows: i. Notification in writing. Any party’s dispute concerning this agreement shall be brought in writing to the attention of the other Party. The other party may provide a written response to the issues raised in the notice within fourteen (14) calendar days of receipt of the notice. ii. Meet and Confer. Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties with respect to any particular dispute, the parties agree to meet and confer in good faith within thirty (30) calendar days after a dispute is raised in writing by one of the parties to discuss and attempt to resolve the dispute. In the event that a party fails to meet and confer within thirty (30) days after the dispute is raised, the Party raising the dispute may immediately submit the matter to the Magistrate Judge for resolution. iii. Submission to Magistrate Judge for arbitration. Failing resolution by the Parties, the Parties may submit the dispute to binding arbitration before the Magistrate Judge assigned to this matter. iv. Attorneys’ Fees regarding Dispute Resolution. Plaintiffs may seek an order imposing attorney’s fees for the time expended in redressing the District’s noncompliance with the Strategic Plan and Activity Timelines. In the event that a Party fails to meet and confer in timely manner, the aggrieved party may seek attorneys’ fees for the time expended in seeking resolution of the dispute. The grant or denial of a request for attorney’s fees is committed to the discretion of the Magistrate Judge.

14

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 13 of 14 Page ID #:1547

1
APPENDIX
2
The program evaluation agreed to in paragraph 2.1(a) of the attached Agreement will 3 include review of the District’s programs, policies and practices to determine the
District’s capacity, resources and needs in the following areas:
4

5 1. Inclusion of students with behavior and mental health disabilities: assessment of staffing, training, and the academic and behavioral interventions

6

needed to include students with behavior-related disabilities in regular

7

classrooms on general education campuses; and review and assessment of

District’s current inclusion sites at Cleveland Elementary School and

8

McKinley Middle School, and proposed inclusion sites at Pasadena High

9

School and a pre-K program.

10 2. Transition of students from segregated settings, including but not limited

to Focus Point Academy, to general education campuses: assessment of

11

PUSD’s protocol for transitioning students from Focus Point Academy or

12

other segregated settings to regular classrooms in PUSD’s general education

campuses, including staff training, and the academic and behavioral

13

interventions at general education campuses.

14

3. Early response to behaviors and academic support to prevent behavior:

15

assessment of programs and staff training on early response to behaviors,

16

comprehensive behavior assessments, implementation of positive behavior

intervention plans, implementation of trauma-informed care and approaches to

17

promoting learning while addressing behaviors.

18 4. Support for multi-system involved youth: assessment of District’s caregiver

19

engagement process and capacity for building community partnerships that

20

would help the District meet the needs of students with disabilities including foster youth.

21

5. Inclusion of Named Plaintiffs: consultation with District staff regarding the

22

current placements of each named Plaintiff, and the academic and behavioral

23

supports needed to include these students in regular classrooms at Defendants’

general education campuses.

24

25

6. Inclusion of Focus Point Academy Students: review of student records to determine an appropriate transition plan for all current Focus Point Academy

26

students to regular classrooms in general education campuses.

27

28

005510.0033125347 486.1

15

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order

Case 2:16-cv-00984-GJS Document 149 Filed 10/31/19 Page 14 of 14 Page ID #:1548

1

2

III.

3

NO ADMISSION OF LIABILITY

4

Parties agree that entering into this Agreement is in no way an admission of

5 liability or wrongdoing by any party.

6

IV.

7

CONFIDENTIALITY

8

Parties agree that all discussions, negotiations, and/or documentation shared

9 on executing this Agreement will constitute efforts to compromise claims under Rule

10 408 of the Federal Rules of Evidence and any comparable state rules of evidence

11 except for this Agreement itself.

12

V.

13

RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

14

15

Each party, through its legal counsel, has participated in the drafting of this

16 Agreement, and any rule of construction to the effect that all vagaries and ambiguities

17 are construed against the party drafting the agreement shall not apply to the

18 interpretation or construction of this Agreement.

19

20
21 IT IS SO ORDERED.

22 DATED: October 31, 2019
23 24

_____________________________
GAIL J. STANDISH UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

25

26

27

28

005510.0033125347 486.1

16

Case No. 2:16-CV-00984-GJS

[Proposed] Order