Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 1 of 23

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his

)

Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda )

Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all )

others similarly situated,

) Civil Action No. _______________

)

M.M., a minor, by and through his Parent, Carla Murphy, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

) ) COMPLAINT -- CLASS ACTION ) ) )

)

J.V., a minor, by and through his

)

Parents, Sharon Vargas and Ismael )

Vargas, individually, and on behalf of )

all others similarly situated,

)

)

R.S., a minor, by and through his Parents, Heather Sanasac and Matthew Sanasac, individually, and on

) ) ) )

behalf of all others similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiffs,

)

)

v.

)

)

The School District of Philadelphia, ) )

Arlene Ackerman, Superintendent, in her official capacity as Superintendent of the School District of Philadelphia,

) ) ) )

) Linda Williams, in her official capacity )

as the Interim Deputy Chief of Special )

Education for the School District of

)

Philadelphia,

)

)

The School Reform Commission, as )

the Board of the School District of

)

Philadelphia,

) )

Defendants.

) )

)

)

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 2 of 23
I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. This action is brought on behalf of thousands of Philadelphia school children with autism seeking elimination of an illegal policy that adversely affects them. Children with autism have difficulty with transitioning from one environment to another as a result of impairments in communication and social interaction skills. In direct conflict with this well-known difficulty of children with autism, the School District of Philadelphia (the “District”) transfers students with autism automatically from one school to another simply because they complete a certain grade. The District uses this Automatic Autism Transfer Policy (the “Policy”) to routinely assign and/or transfer students with autism, including rising third graders with autism to different schools for grades 3 through 5, and rising fifth graders with autism to different schools for grades 6 through 8 based on their status as children with autism. Non-disabled children enjoy continued and uninterrupted attendance in K-5 schools or K-8 schools. 2. The Policy, as established and as implemented, violates the purpose and intent of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (“IDEA”) and Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code (“Chapter 14”) as it occurs with little or no parental notice or involvement, without required consideration of children’s individualized circumstances, and in direct violation of the mandated individual planning process of the IDEA. Furthermore, this admitted policy of the District is based solely on the fact that the children have autism contrary to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“Section 504”), and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). 3. Plaintiffs bring this claim on their own behalf and on behalf of all other students within the District who are or will be subjected to the District’s Policy (the “Class”). Class relief
2

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 3 of 23
is necessary because of the systemic nature of the Defendants’ conduct and because the large number of children harmed by the Policy makes joinder of all Class members impracticable.
II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. The claims herein arise under the IDEA, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004) and 34 Code of Federal Regulations Chapter 300, Chapter 14, 22 Pa. Code § 14.1 et seq., the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 et seq., and Section 504, 29 U.S.C. § 794. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 20 U.S.C. §§ 1415(i)(2) and 1415(i)(3)(A). 5. The claims herein for declaratory and injunctive relief pending the resolution of this matter are authorized by 28 U.S.C §§ 2201 and 2202. 6. This Court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code is the state special education law that must be consistent with the IDEA. 22 Pa. Code § 14.1 et seq. 7. The claims for injunctive relief in the form of enforcement of Plaintiffs’ and the Class’ right to remain in current educational placements during the pendency of this proceeding (“Stay-Put Relief”) is authorized by 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j). 8. Venue in this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b). 9. Plaintiffs have exhausted or are not required to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to the IDEA, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1415(i)(2) and 1415(i)(3)(A).
a. Where, as here, a district is engaged in a policy that violates the IDEA and that is inconsistent with the individualized nature of the IDEA, such a policy can evade review through the administrative process and may properly be brought before the Court without exhaustion of administrative remedies. Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305 (1988) (state suspension policy could evade review); Christopher S. v. Stanislaus County, 384 F.3d 1205 (9th Cir. 2004) (shortened school day for children with autism was policy and not subject to exhaustion of administrative remedies).
3

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 4 of 23
b. Even if administrative exhaustion pursuant to the IDEA were required, which it is not, Plaintiffs P.V. and M.M. have already exhausted through the IDEA hearing process, each of them receiving a hearing officer decision dated April 15, 2011, attached hereto as Ex. A. and Ex. B. respectively. (Ex. A., P.V. v. SDP, ODR No. 01541-1011 and Ex. B., M.M. v. SDP, ODR No. 01539-1011.) In those decisions, the Hearing Officer (“H.O.”) found for the families but ordered the District to re-propose placement for the 2011-2012 school year requiring the families to again object through the administrative hearing process for a second time. The Hearing Officer stressed that with regard to the District’s Automatic Transfer Policy he “lack[ed] authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures” and he “encouraged the District to alter its procedures on a broader scope.” (Ex. A. at 15; Ex. B. at 15) (emphasis added). This Complaint constitutes an appeal from the administrative proceedings by P.V. and M.M.
c. Furthermore, were administrative exhaustion pursuant to the IDEA required, Plaintiffs J.V. and R.S. and the rest of the Class are exempted from the IDEA’s usual administrative exhaustion requirement because exhaustion is clearly futile given the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy and the holding of the hearing officer in the prior two cases that he does not have the power to order a District wide-systemic change, essentially requiring families to exhaust and re-exhaust indeterminably. Beth V. v. Carroll, 87 F.3d 80, 90 (3d Cir. 1996) (noting exhaustion not required where it would be futile or inadequate or where the agency cannot grant adequate relief, or where exhaustion would work a severe harm); see also R.B. v. Mastery Charter Sch., No. 2:10-cv-06722, 2010 WL 5464892, at *6 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 29, 2010). Moreover, J.V. and R.S. together filed a joint complaint with the Pennsylvania Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education about the issues of over-enrollment as they impact transfer practices. (Ex. A. at 3-5; Ex. B. at 35.) Also, J.V. and R.S. each have requested an individual hearing, though they believe that as to the Transfer Policy, the hearings are futile.
10. The Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act
incorporate the remedies and procedures of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §
2000d et seq. See 29 U.S.C. § 794a; 42 U.S.C. § 12133. Title VI has no exhaustion requirement.
See Herring v. Chichester Sch. Dist., No. 06-5525, 2007 WL 3287400 (E.D. Pa. Nov. 6, 2007).
III. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK
11. The IDEA requires public schools that receive federal funds to provide a free and
appropriate public education (“FAPE”) to all students with disabilities ages 3 to 21 based on the
4

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 5 of 23
individual unique needs of the student and subject to certain procedural requirements to ensure meaningful parental participation in the process of the child’s education. 20 U.S.C. § 1400, § 1412(a), § 1414, § 1415, and see 34 Code of Federal Regulations Chapter § 300. The named minor Plaintiffs and Class members each qualify as “child[ren] with a disability” under the statute, and each has an Individual Education Plan (“IEP”) that governs his or her education. 20 U.S.C. § 1401(3), § 1414(d), § 1415. The District receives federal funds pursuant to the IDEA and is bound by the IDEA.
12. Each named plaintiff and Class member has an IEP Team that is comprised of parents and school staff who are to make educational decisions for the child, including school placement. The IDEA mandates that decisions about a child’s educational placement are to be made individually through the IEP team process and with the parent’s meaningful involvement. Specifically, the IDEA provides that “each local educational agency shall ensure that the parents of each child with a disability are members of any group that makes decisions on the educational placement of their child.” 20 U.S.C. § 1414(e); see also 20 U.S.C. § 1415; 34 C.F.R. § 300.327. The District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy constitutes a “one-size fits all” approach which is in direct conflict with the statutory framework of the IDEA which mandates parental involvement and individual planning through the IEP team process.
13. The ADA mandates that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity.” 42 U.S.C § 12132. The District is a public entity within the meaning of 42 U.S.C § 1231(1). The named minor Plaintiffs and Class members are qualified individuals with a disability, protected from discrimination on the basis of their disability. 42 U.S.C. § 1231(2); 28 C.F.R. §
5

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 6 of 23
35.104. The District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy excludes or limits children with autism from experiencing the typical school attendance procedures that non-disabled children enjoy which includes continued attendance at one elementary school or middle school until and through the last grade of said school absent a family move, disciplinary matter, or parental request for move.
14. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits disability discrimination in federally funded programs. It mandates that “[n]o otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance . . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). The District is a federal funds recipient within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 794(b)(2)(B). The named minor Plaintiffs and Class members are “disabled” students who were otherwise qualified to participate in school activities and who are entitled to the protection of Section 504. The District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy excludes or limits children with autism from experiencing the typical school attendance procedures that non-disabled children enjoy which includes continued attendance at one elementary school, or middle school until and through the last grade of said school absent a family move, disciplinary matter, or parental request for move.
IV. PARTIES 15. Nine year-old Plaintiff, P.V., is a third grader who resides with his parents, Plaintiffs Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz (“Parents of P.V.”) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania within the boundaries of the School District of Philadelphia. He attends Richmond Elementary School, a Kindergarten through Grade 5 school. P.V. has autism and receives autistic support, necessitating his access to an autism support (“AS”) classroom. P.V. is entitled to the
6

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 7 of 23
protections of the IDEA and is a qualified individual with a disability entitled to the protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504. At the end of the 2009-2010 school year, the District announced to P.V.’s parents that he would not be allowed to remain at Richmond to complete his third grade year during the 2010-2011 school year because of the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy. Very shortly before the start of the 2010-2011 school year, it was not clear where P.V. should attend, so he returned to Richmond. P.V.’s family filed for an administrative hearing, requested “Stay Put” protection, and eventually secured a hearing officer’s order which resulted in P.V.’s being allowed to stay at Richmond for the completion of his third grade year. (Ex. A, P.V. v. SDP, H.O. Decision, April 15, 2011.) On June 16, 2011, once again because of the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, the District administration abruptly proposed P.V.’s move to McKinley Elementary School, which move will occur absent this complaint and appeal entitling P.V. to “Stay Put” pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j). In stark contrast, non-disabled rising fourth graders are not required to transfer from Richmond Elementary or other K-5 schools in the District.
16. Nine year-old Plaintiff M.M. is currently a third grade student who resides with his parent, Plaintiff Carla Murphy (“Parent of M.M”) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania within the boundaries of the School District of Philadelphia. He attends Richmond Elementary School. M.M. has autism and receives autistic support, necessitating his access to an autism support classroom. M.M. is entitled to the protections of the IDEA and is a qualified individual with a disability entitled to the protections of the ADA and Section 504. In late spring 2010, the District advised M.M.’s mother via his home-school notebook that he would not be allowed to remain at Richmond to complete his third grade year during the 2010-2011 school year because of the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy. In the fall of 2010, it was not clear where
7

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 8 of 23
M.M. was to attend school, so M.M. returned to Richmond. In early September 2010, M.M.’s family filed for an administrative hearing, requested “Stay Put” protection, and eventually secured a hearing officer’s order which resulted in M.M.’s being allowed to stay for the completion of the year. (Ex. B, M.M. v. SDP, H.O. Decision, April 15, 2011.) As of the filing of this complaint, Ms. Murphy presently does not know if M.M. will be allowed to return to Richmond for his fourth grade year, absent this complaint and appeal entitling M.M. to “Stay Put” pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j). Nondisabled rising fourth graders are not required to transfer out of Richmond Elementary School or other K-5 schools in the District.
17. Eight year-old Plaintiff J.V. is currently a second grade student who resides with his parents, Plaintiffs Sharon Vargas and Ismael Vargas (“Parents of J.V.”) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania within the boundaries of the District. He currently attends Richmond Elementary School, a Kindergarten through Grade 5 school. J.V. has autism and receives autistic support, necessitating his access to an autism support classroom. There is no dispute that J.V. is entitled to the protections of the IDEA and is a qualified individual with a disability entitled to the protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504. As of the filing of this complaint, J.V.’s parents have received no Notice of Recommended Educational Placement/Prior Written Notice (“NOREP/PWN”) that J.V. will be allowed to return to Richmond for the 20112012 school year, absent their acceptance of a “settlement” offer made by the District in connection with a due process complaint that is currently pending. In contrast, non-disabled rising third graders are not required to leave Richmond, a K-5 school.
18. Eight year-old Plaintiff R.S. is a second grade student who resides with his parents, Heather Sanasac and Matthew Sanasac in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania within the boundaries of the District. He is presently attending Richmond Elementary School. R.S. has
8

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 9 of 23
autism and receives autistic support, necessitating his access to an autism support classroom. R.S. is entitled to the protections of the IDEA and is a qualified individual with a disability entitled to the protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504. As of the filing of this complaint, R.S. has not received written confirmation through a Notice of Recommended Placement/Prior Written Notice (“NOREP/PWN”) that he will be allowed to return to Richmond, absent a “settlement” offer made by the District in connection with a due process complaint that is currently pending. In contrast, non-disabled rising third graders are not required to leave Richmond, a K-5 school.
19. Defendant, the School District of Philadelphia, is a school district within the Commonwealth Pennsylvania organized pursuant to the Public School Code of 1949, Act of March 10, 1949, P.L. 30, as amended, 24 P.S. 1-101 et seq. The District’s headquarters and principal place of business is located at 440 N. Broad Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The District is the Local Educational Agency responsible to ensure that Plaintiffs receive a free appropriate public education pursuant to the IDEA and Chapter 14. The District also operates as Intermediate Unit 26. The District, as a public entity, receives federal funds and is subject to the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504.
20. Defendant School Reform Commission (“SRC”) is the five member governing body of the District. It acts as the School Board and was established in December 2001 when oversight of the School District shifted to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The SRC chairman, Robert L. Archie, Jr. can be contacted at the District’s headquarters, at 440 N. Broad Street, Suite 101, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
21. Defendant Arlene Ackerman is the Superintendent of the School District of Philadelphia and is named herein in her official capacity. Ackerman is responsible for the
9

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 10 of 23
effective operation of the District and the implementation of policies and procedures adopted by the District and the SRC.
22. Defendant Linda Williams is the Interim Deputy Chief of Special Education of the School District of Philadelphia and is named herein in her official capacity. Williams is directly responsible for the District’s compliance with the requirements of the IDEA and Chapter 14.
V. CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 23. Plaintiffs bring this suit individually and as a Class Action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) and 23(b)(3) on behalf of all similarly situated individuals. The Class that Plaintiffs seek to represent is composed of: All children with autism in the School District of Philadelphia in grades kindergarten through eight (“K-8”) who have been illegally transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are at risk of being illegally transferred, as a result of the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, the parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class. 24. The Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. Currently, there are at least 3,000 to 4,0001 students in autism support classes in the District and thousands more that will be affected by the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy in the future. The exact number of Class members is not fully known to Plaintiffs at present but can be ascertained by Defendants. Despite repeated requests for the number of students in autism support classes and a list of where those classes are located, the District has declined to provide exact information. Upon information and belief, based upon testimony of District staff during administrative hearings, there are approximately 60 autism support classrooms within the District, which
1 Upon information and belief, there may be even more children with autism in the District. The number quoted is in reliance on the oral testimony of District representative Maria Monras-Sender during a recent hearing involving J.V.
10

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 11 of 23
include autism support classrooms for children grades K-2, 3-5, and 6-8. As recently as June 16, 2011, during a meeting with District representatives and their counsel, the District indicated that it did not have a list of the locations of autism support classrooms within the District.
25. There are questions of law and fact common to the Class and that predominate over any questions affecting only individual members of the Class. Specifically, there are questions as to the legality of Defendants’ systemic acts or omissions with respect to the District’s autism support programs, as a result of the impact of the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, under the IDEA, Chapter 14, Section 504, and the ADA.
26. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the Class as all members are similarly affected by Defendants’ conduct in violation of the law that is complained of herein.
27. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class. 28. Counsel for Plaintiffs are experienced in handling federal class action litigation and will adequately and zealously represent the interests of the Class. The Public Interest Law Center has litigated many federal class actions to protect the civil rights of persons and children with disabilities. Dechert LLP is likewise experienced in complex federal litigation. 29. Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the Class, so that final injunctive relief or declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the Class as a whole. P.V. and M.M. filed administrative hearings in early September 2010 challenging the legality of the District’s Automatic Transfer Policy. On April 15, 2011, the District was warned by an IDEA administrative hearing officer that it should “alter its procedures [regarding transfers of children with autism] on a broader scope, if only to avoid a plethora of identical claims from similarly situated students.” (Ex. A. at 15; Ex. B. at 15) (emphasis added). The same hearing officer believed his authority was limited, thus precluding his ability to decide whether “the
11

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 12 of 23
District’s AS [“autistic support”] programs as a whole are structurally flawed.” (Ex. A. at 3; Ex. B at 3.) In May 2011, the District received J.V.’s hearing request and admitted that it still had no Grade 3-5 Autism Support classroom at Richmond Elementary School. As of June 16, 2011, despite the hearing officer’s pronouncements, the District would not confirm abandonment of the faulty Automatic Autism Transfer Policy and proposed transfer (again) of P.V. The District appears committed to the Policy as a matter of administrative convenience.
30. A class action is superior to any other available method for fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy in that there is no interest by members of the Class in individually controlling the prosecution of separate actions; upon information and belief no similar litigation concerning the claims herein has already begun by any Class member; it is desirable to concentrate the litigation of the claims made herein in a single proceeding; and whatever difficulties may exist in the management of the Class will be greatly outweighed by the class action process, including, but not limited to, providing Class members with a method for redress of claims more fairly, efficiently, and consistently than individual litigation may provide.
31. It would be futile to require Plaintiffs to exhaust or re-exhaust administrative remedies since the District has adopted a systemic policy of transferring children with autism, and as a result Pennsylvania’s special education administrative hearing system cannot, as expressly noted by the hearing officer, adequately remedy the systemic problem. Furthermore, upon information and belief, there are not enough special education hearing officers available to timely handle the number of due process hearing requests that would be necessary.
32. Plaintiffs P.V. and M.M. seek no individual compensatory education relief pursuant to the IDEA as they have been awarded compensatory education for their loss of educational benefit by the hearing officer’s decisions. They seek only to have the Policy
12

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 13 of 23
declared illegal so that they will no longer be subject to it and will instead be treated fairly within the IDEA process as to their placements in future years.
33. Plaintiffs J.V. and R.S. seek to have the Policy declared illegal so that they will no longer be subject to it and will instead be treated fairly within the IDEA process as to their placements for third grade and in future years. Any individual compensatory education relief to which they are entitled can be ordered by a hearing officer and they have requested relief from same in the hearings now pending. The hearing officers assigned, will not, however, be able to provide them relief from being subjected to the illegal Policy now or in the future.
VI. FACTS The Automatic Autism Transfer Policy And The Hearing Officer’s Decisions Of April 15, 2011 34. Each of the named Plaintiffs and the rest of the Class have been subjected to and continue to be adversely affected by the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy. 35. The District operates schools that serve children grades K-5 and K-8. Nondisabled children who attend a K-5 school or a K-8 school are not transferred unless the family moves, a transfer is requested, or the child is transferred for disciplinary reasons. 36. The District maintains autism support classrooms throughout the District in its K5 and K-8 schools. In the District, elementary autism support classes are divided based on age, specifically, Kindergarten through Second Grade (“K-2”) and Grade Three through Grade Five (“3-5”). The District has some Grade six through Grade eight (“6-8”) autism support classes. 37. The K-2, 3-5 and 6-8 autism support classrooms are randomly placed throughout the District. The exact number and location of autism support classrooms is not known at this
13

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 14 of 23
time. However, it is known that a K-5 school may not have both a K-2 and 3-5 autism support classroom and a K-8 school may not have autism support classrooms for K-2, 3-5 and 6-8.2
38. Children with autism are transferred from one school to another school under the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy without regard to their individual unique needs, without parental notice or participation, and outside of the IEP team process. Individuals other than the child’s teacher or even school principal make the transfer decision. For example, pursuant to the District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, second graders in autism support placements are regularly forced to move to different schools for third grade while their non-disabled peers can continue on in their same schools until fifth grade (if a K-5 school) or eighth grade (if a K-8 school). These students with autism are forced to move solely because of their disability.
39. According to the District’s website, there are more than 54 K-2 autism support classes in the District and an unknown number of 3-5 autism support classes. However, upon information and belief, there are few K-5 schools or Kindergarten through Eighth grade (“K-8”) schools that have both a K-2 and 3-5 autism support classroom. District representatives assert that there are K-8 schools with a K-2, 3-5 and 6-8 classroom, but the only one identified by those representatives, McKinley Elementary School (a K-8) school was visited by the parents and does not currently have a 6-8 classroom.
40. Richmond Elementary School, a K-5 school, contains one K-2 autistic support classroom, but no 3-5 autistic support classroom. On May 5 and May 25, 2011, in answers to hearing requests from J.V. and R.S., the District twice stated that it had no 3-5 classroom at Richmond and defended its failure to have a 3-5 classroom. Recently, in June 2011, presumably
2 For example, District representatives have asserted that McKinley Elementary School, a K-8 school “will have” a K-2, 3-5 and 6-8 autism support classroom. The latest plans submitted to the Pennsylvania Department of Education list McKinley as having only a K-2 and two 3-5 classrooms.
14

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 15 of 23
in response to the hearing officer’s decision, District administrators suggested that they intend to develop a 3-5 autistic support classroom there during 2011-2012. However, no teacher has been hired to date and no 3-5 teachers have been trained to support inclusive opportunities for children who would attend a 3-5 autistic support classroom at Richmond. Furthermore, District administrators have proposed moving P.V. from Richmond Elementary School which is inconsistent with the creation of a 3-5 autistic support classroom at Richmond. Upon information and belief, there are other elementary schools in the District that contain either a K-2 autistic support classroom or a 3-5 autistic support classroom, but not both.
41. The District has wholly admitted to its practice of setting up K-2 autism support programs in schools separate from the 3-5 autism support programs and to implementing the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, regardless of the fact that violates applicable federal and state law. The Hearing Officer found that in Richmond, non-disabled children start in kindergarten and transfer to another building after fifth grade unless the family moves, the parents request a building transfer or the student is moved for disciplinary reasons, but that students who require an autism support classroom are upper leveled after second grade because there is no 3-5 autism support classroom in that building. (Ex. A at 5; Ex. B at 5.)
42. Some of the details of the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy were explored at the joint administrative hearings for P.V. and M.M. that was held from December 2010 through February 2011, including the testimony of Maria Monras-Sender, the Executive Director of the Office of Specialized Instruction (“OSIS”), Cathy Roccia-Meier of the Philadelphia Right to Education Local Task Force, Anthony Ciampoli, Principal of Richmond Elementary School, and Leah Taylor, Special Education Teacher at Richmond Elementary School.
15

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 16 of 23
43. In the hearing decisions for P.V. and M.M., both dated April 15, 2011, Hearing Officer Ford found that “the District violated the Parents’ right to participation by reassigning the Student to a different school building without sending IDEA-compliant prior written notice.” The Hearing Officer further stated: “Although the Hearing Officer lacks authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures, it is well within the Hearing Officer’s authority to compel the District to issue a NOREP and a Procedural Safeguards Notice every time it proposes a building reassignment for this Student.” (Ex. A at 15, Ex. B at 15.)
44. At the administrative hearings for P.V. and M.M. Executive Director MonrasSender admitted that the District does not even maintain a list of the schools that have K-2 or 3-5 autism support classes. (Transcript of Due Process Hearing Proceedings for M.M. and P.V. (“Hearing Tr.”), vol. 3, 487-89, Feb. 4, 2011.)
45. Ms. Monras-Sender testified that the District does not transfer non-disabled rising third graders to different schools. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 477, Feb. 4, 2011). Furthermore, it already has been found in the administrative hearing process that “[w]hen a [typical] student in the District reaches the end of his or her building age level, he or she is moved to another building.” This is simply not the case for children with autism because of the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy. As has been found in the administrative hearing process, at Richmond for example, “non-disabled children start in kindergarten and transfer to another building after fifth grade unless the family moves, the parents request a building transfer or the student is moved for disciplinary reasons.” (Ex. A at 5; Ex. B at 5.)
46. Ms. Monras-Sender acknowledged that when a child with autism is transferred to a new building for third grade, there is no way for either a parent or an IEP team to appeal the building placement. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 547, Feb. 4, 2011.)
16

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 17 of 23
47. Ms. Monras-Sender conceded that if there was list of all the locations of the K-2 and 3-5 classes that “there’s no reason that a list cannot be provided” to the parents. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 487-89, Feb. 4, 2011.)
48. As a result of Pennsylvania Ass’n for Retarded Children (PARC) v. Commonwealth, 334 F. Supp. 1257 (E.D. Pa. 1971), Philadelphia has a Right to Education Local Task Force. The Philadelphia Right to Education Local Taskforce’s website is found at www.philadelphialtf.org. On or about 2004, the Philadelphia Right to Education Local Task Force specifically informed the District that its system of scattered K-2, 3-5 and 6-8 classes interrupted the K-5 and K-8 experience of children with autism and that such policy is contrary to appropriate programming for children with autism. Cathy Roccia-Meier of the Local Task Force testified at the P.V. and M.M. hearings that “one of the major recommendations [of the Task Force] was that any school that had an autistic support program should cover the grade ranges of students in that school. If it’s K to 8, we recommended it be K to 8. If it was K to 5, it should be K to 5, of course, because transition is one of the most difficult areas for students with disabilities.” (Hearing Tr. vol. 1, 38-39, Dec. 10, 2010) (emphasis added).
49. The District is aware that its Policy has been criticized by the Right to Education Local Task Force, but has done nothing in the past seven years to fix the problem. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 493, Feb. 4, 2011.)
50. District Special Education Administrator Ms. Monras-Sender testified that she favors continuity of services and programming for children with autism. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 494, 533-34, Feb. 4, 2011.)
51. Ms. Monras-Sender admitted that the District has no specific plan to provide continuity of services for children with autism. (Hearing Tr. vol. 3, 495, Feb. 4, 2011.)
17

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 18 of 23
52. As late as May 25, 2011, the District admitted that “it has not made a decision yet whether Richmond will have an AS classroom that would serve third graders for the 2011-2012 school year.” (District’s Answer, May 25, 2011.)
53. Instead of involving parents in the process to determine even where a child would be transferred, through the mandated IEP team process, administrators or their staff who are not part of the IEP team and often who have never met the child unilaterally make transfer decisions without even first consulting with parents and the IEP team, including the child’s teacher. “Both IEPs and NOREPs specify the building that the Student is [currently] assigned to” yet “[n]either a NOREP nor a procedural safeguards letter is sent” before transferring the child. (Ex. A at 6; Ex. B at 6.) The District takes the position that parents have no right to be involved in or even be timely informed of the location of their child’s services.
54. In addition to the per se illegal nature of the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy, there are additional negative consequences to children with autism as a result of the haphazard nature of the District’s placement of autistic support classrooms throughout the District. Children with autism are relegated to classrooms that are over-enrolled and that lack sufficiently trained staff and resources to ensure inclusive opportunities for children with autism, and children with autism are frequently not educated in the Least Restrictive Environment. In both P.V. and M.M.’s case, they were denied access to regular education settings as a result of overenrollment, insufficient staff and insufficiently trained staff. In J.V. and R.S.’s case, their parents filed complaints with the Pennsylvania Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education. (Ex. A at 3; Ex. B at 3). Richmond Elementary School’s special education autism support teacher, Leah Taylor, forthrightly testified that her K-2 autism support classroom at Richmond Elementary School was over-enrolled in December 2010 and has been for the past
18

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 19 of 23
three years. (Hearing Tr. vol. 1, 109-10, Dec. 10, 2010.) Ms. Taylor noted that over-enrollment causes her to be “spread too thin” (Hearing Tr. vol. 1, 128, Dec. 10, 2010) and that the children would be making more progress if her class was not over-enrolled. (Hearing Tr. vol. 2, 414, Feb. 3. 2011.) Despite the District’s suggestion that it might create a 3-5 classroom at Richmond Elementary School, the District has failed to take any necessary steps to ensure District-wide that children with autism who are grades K-8 would have access to regular education classrooms with sufficient staff and resources, or taken any steps to ensure that over-enrollment does not continue as a result of the haphazard Automatic Autism Transfer Policy.
VII. LEGAL CLAIMS Count One: Violation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 55. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. 56. The District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy is established and implemented in a manner that is completely contrary to the IDEA because the decisions about the placement of children into different schools and classes are made without regard to the individual unique needs of each child, substantially infringe upon meaningful parental involvement in the process and are made wholly outside of the procedural safeguards and requirements of the IDEA. 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d); 20 U.S.C. § 1415. 57. Wherefore, Plaintiffs and the Class demand judgment in their favor and against Defendants for declaratory and injunctive relief set forth herein.
Count Two: Violation of Chapter 14 58. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
19

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 20 of 23
59. The District’s Automatic Autism Transfer Policy is established and implemented in a manner that is completely contrary to the IDEA because the decisions about the placement of children into different schools and classes are made without regard to the individual unique needs of each child, substantially infringe upon meaningful parental involvement in the process and are made wholly outside of the procedural safeguards and requirements of Chapter 14. The Policy is contrary as well to the requirements of Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code, specifically Section 14.145 that children be educated in the least restrictive environment.
60. Wherefore, Plaintiffs and the Class demand judgment in their favor and against Defendants for declaratory and injunctive relief set forth herein.
Count Three: Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act 61. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein. 62. The Defendants have violated the rights of the Plaintiffs and Class by the establishment and implementation of the Automatic Autism Transfer Policy resulting in the random assignment of students into various autistic support classes. By requiring the Plaintiffs and Class to transfer to different schools at ages when non-disabled students are not required to transfer to new schools because of age, the District has discriminated against the Plaintiffs and Class because of their disability of autism. 63. Wherefore, Plaintiffs and the Class demand judgment in their favor and against Defendants for declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages set forth herein.
Count Four: Violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act 64. Plaintiffs incorporate the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if set forth in full herein.
20

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 21 of 23
65. The Defendants violate Plaintiffs’ and the Class’ Section 504 rights by requiring students with autism to transfer to a different school at a certain age solely because they are disabled as a result of autism. The Defendants have admitted that non-disabled students are not subjected to the Policy.
66. Wherefore, Plaintiffs and the Class demand judgment in their favor and against Defendants for declaratory relief, injunctive relief, and damages set forth herein.
VIII. RELIEF REQUESTED WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that: 1. The Court take jurisdiction of this matter, and certify the matter as a Class Action. 2. Order that the “The Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” is illegal, and contrary to the
IDEA, Section 504, the ADA, and may no longer be used. 3. Order that the named plaintiffs are protected pursuant to the IDEA’s “Stay Put”
provision at 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j) and permit them to stay in their placements unless otherwise agreed by the parents and the District. 4. Order that the District immediately create and publicly disseminate a list of all of the schools within the District that house any autistic support classroom for grades K-8 (K-2, 3-5, or 6-8). This list shall be provided to the Philadelphia Right to Education Local Task Force. 5. Order that consistent with the IDEA’s IEP process provisions discussed supra, the District will establish a new written plan and pattern and policy to provide continuity of programming for students with autism. The plan shall be developed with parental involvement. The plan shall provide that as the District develops or changes classrooms, the District shall ensure that any school which contains an autism support
21

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 22 of 23 classroom shall offer autism programming for the same years that the school provides programming for children who are not disabled. Such programs shall cover grades K8 to provide the same opportunity for meaningful integration into the school community for students with autism as their non-disabled peers.
6. Order that consistent with IDEA parental participation requirements, the District maintain an accurate list of where the autism support classes are currently located and this list be published annually and provided to parents of children with autism at each IEP meeting so that they may be involved in the process to determine where their child will attend school.
7. Order that consistent with IDEA parental participation/prior written notice requirements that an IEP meeting shall be held and a Notice of Recommended Educational Placement/Prior Written Notice shall be issued indicating what school the child will attend before reassigning a child with autism to another school;
22

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 1 Filed 06/20/11 Page 23 of 23

8. Award to Plaintiffs their costs and attorneys fees; and 9. Grant such other and further relief as may be just and proper.

Dated: June 20, 2011

Respectfully,
Sonja Kerr (I.D. No. 310800) skerr@pilcop.org
PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA 1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, Second Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 627-7100 Facsimile: (215) 627-3183 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs
Cheryl Krause (I.D. No. 90297) cheryl.krause@dechert.com
Tara L. Kelly (I.D. No. 201822) tara.kelly@dechert.com
Darla D. Woodring (I.D. No. 306866 ) darla.woodring@dechert.com
DECHERT LLP Cira Centre 2929 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19104-2808 Telephone: (215) 994-4000 Facsimile: (215) 994-2222 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs

23

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
The School District of Philadelphia, et al.
Defendants.

: CIVIL ACTION : : : : : : : : : NO. 2:11-cv-04027 : :

MEMORANDUM

Legrome D. Davis, J.

October 31, 2011

I. Factual Background and Procedural History This lawsuit concerns the School District of Philadelphia’s (the “District”) treatment of,
and policies governing, school children with autism. The four (4) named plaintiffs in the purported class action Complaint, P.V., M.M., J.V., and R.S., are all autistic second- or third-grade students at Richmond Elementary School, a Kindergarten through Grade 5 (“K-5") school in the District. (Doc. No. 1 ¶¶ 15-18). Plaintiffs contend that the District transfers students with autism automatically from one school to another, simply because they complete a certain grade, more frequently than the District transfers non-disabled students who therefore, unlike autistic children, enjoy continued, uninterrupted attendance in K-5 schools or K-8 schools. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 1). This is

1

particularly problematic because children with autism have difficulty transitioning from one environment to another. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 1). Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges that the District transfers autistic students with little or no parental notice or involvement, and without the required consideration of the children’s individualized circumstances. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 2). Plaintiffs style these transfers as an “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” (the “Policy”), a characterization that Defendants vigorously dispute. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 1; Doc. No. 12, at 10 (arguing that the alleged “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” does not exist)).
According to Plaintiffs, the District’s Policy violates the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. (“IDEA”), Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Plaintiffs seek relief on their own behalf, as well as class relief on behalf of all other students within the District who are or will be subject to the Policy. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 3). The plights of the four (4) named plaintiffs are said to illustrate the effect of the District’s Policy on children with autism.
P.V., a third grader with autism, attends Richmond Elementary School. At the end of the 2009-10 school year, the District announced to P.V.’s parents that P.V. would not be allowed to remain at Richmond to complete third grade during the 2010-11 school year. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 15). P.V.’s family filed for an administrative hearing, requested “Stay Put” protection, and eventually secured a hearing officer’s order which resulted in P.V.’s being allowed to attend Richmond for third grade. (Id.) On June 16, 2011, the District proposed transferring P.V. to McKinley Elementary School for fourth grade. In contrast, the District does not require non-disabled rising fourth graders to transfer from Richmond Elementary or other K-5 schools in the District. (Id.)
2

Like P.V., M.M. is a third grader with autism who attends Richmond Elementary School. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 16). In late spring of 2010, the District advised M.M.’s mother via his home-school notebook that he would not be allowed to remain at Richmond for his third grade year during the 2010-11 school year. (Id.) In early September, 2010, M.M.’s family filed for an administrative hearing and secured a hearing officer’s “Stay Put” order which resulted in M.M.’s being allowed to stay at Richmond to complete third grade. (Id.) At the time Plaintiffs filed their Complaint, M.M.’s mother did not know if M.M. would be allowed to return to Richmond for his fourth grade year. (Id.)
Plaintiff J.V. is a second grader with autism who attends Richmond Elementary School. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 17). As of the filing of the Complaint in this matter, J.V.’s parents had received no Notice of Recommended Educational Placement / Prior Written Notice (“NOREP/PWN”) that J.V. will be allowed to return to Richmond for the 2011-12 school year, absent their acceptance of a “settlement” offer made by the District in connection with a due process complaint that is currently pending. (Id.)
Finally, Plaintiff R.S., like Plaintiff J.V., is a second grader with autism who attends Richmond Elementary School. (Doc. No. 1 ¶ 18). Similar to J.V., as of the filing of the Complaint, R.S.’s parents had received no Notice of Recommended Educational Placement / Prior Written Notice (“NOREP/PWN”) that R.S. will be allowed to return to Richmond, absent their acceptance of a “settlement” offer made by the District in connection with a due process complaint that is currently pending.1 (Id.)
1According to Defendants, the District has now offered all four named plaintiffs a placement in Richmond Elementary’s new 3-5 autism support classroom until the fifth grade.
(continued...) 3

These four (4) plaintiffs brought this suit against the School District of Philadelphia; the School Reform Commission; Arlene Ackerman, Superintendent of the School District of Philadelphia, in her official capacity; and Linda Williams, Interim Deputy Chief of Special Education for the School District of Philadelphia, in her official capacity, seeking various forms of relief from the allegedly illegal “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy.” (Doc. No. 1, at 21-23). Most broadly, Plaintiffs ask the Court to declare that the Policy violates IDEA, Section 504, and the ADA, and may no longer be used. (Doc. No. 1, at 21). Plaintiffs emphasize that they cannot obtain this structural relief through an administrative hearing, so judicial intervention is necessary. Specifically, Brian Jason Ford, the hearing officer presiding over P.V.’s and M.M.’s administrative hearings, concluded that “the District violated the Parent’s right to participation by reassigning the Student [P.V. and M.M.] to a different school building without sending IDEA-compliant prior written notice.” (Doc. No. 1-4, at 15; Doc. No. 1-5, at 15). However, Ford noted that he “lacks authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures,” so he merely encouraged the District “to alter its procedures on a broader scope, if only to avoid a plethora of identical claims from similarly situated students.” (Doc. No. 1-4, at 15; Doc. No. 1-5, at 15).
Also on a broad scale, Plaintiffs request that we order the District to (1) create, maintain, and publicly disseminate a list of all the schools within the District that house any autistic support classroom; (2) develop a new policy, with parental involvement, to provide continuity of programming for students with autism; and (3) conduct Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) meetings, again with parental involvement, before reassigning a child with autism to another
1
(...continued) (Doc. No. 11, at 21).
4

school (Doc. No. 1, at 22). More narrowly, Plaintiffs additionally request that we order the District to permit them to remain at Richmond Elementary unless otherwise agreed by the Plaintiffs’ parents and the District. (Doc. No. 1, at 21).
Procedurally, this matter remains in its infancy. Defendants have not yet filed an answer to Plaintiffs’ Complaint, we have not issued a scheduling order, discovery has not yet begun, and neither party has moved for class certification under Rule 23.2 At this early stage of the proceedings, Defendants have moved to strike Plaintiffs’ class action allegations (Doc. No. 12), and to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against all defendants pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and the claims against the individual, official capacity defendants pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). (Doc. No. 11). Plaintiffs oppose the motions, which are now ripe for disposition. For the reasons discussed below, we deny Defendants’ motion to strike and motion to dismiss. II. Legal Analysis
A. Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations According to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(d)(1)(D), formerly Rule 23(d)(4), a court may “require that the pleadings be amended to eliminate allegations about representation of absent persons and that the action proceed accordingly” in conducting a class action. One leading treatise describes the close interaction of this provision with the class certification decision: Subdivision (d)(4) [now (d)(1)(D)] is procedurally inseparable from subdivision (c)(1)(A), which provides that “when a person sues or is sued as a representative of a class, the court must—at an early practicable time—determine by order whether to certify the action as a class action.”
After a determination has been made that a class action is not proper under Rule 23(c)(1), courts typically issue
2Pursuant to our Order of September 28, 2011 (Doc. No. 15), Plaintiffs have thirty (30) days from the conclusion of discovery to move for class certification in this matter.
5

, an order requiring that the pleadings be amended to reflect that decision although this often is done without reference to Rule 23(d)(4) [now (d)(1)(D)]. 7B Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller, Mary Kay Kane, & Richard L. Marcus, Federal Practice & Procedure § 1795 (3d ed. 2011) (emphasis added). This description of Rule 23(d)(1)(D) suggests that, in general, a court should wait to resolve a motion to strike class allegations until someone moves for class certification. Another well-respected treatise agrees, noting that, while a “motion to strike class action allegations may properly be filed before plaintiffs have filed a motion for class certification,” “[i]f the viability of a class depends on factual matters that must be developed through discovery, a motion to strike will be denied pending the full-blown certification motion.” 1 Joseph M. McLaughlin, McLaughlin on Class Actions § 3:4 (7th ed. 2010). While the Third Circuit Court of Appeals has not yet directly addressed this issue, district courts in the Third Circuit typically deny as premature motions to strike class action allegations filed before the plaintiff moves for class certification. For example, in Korman v. Walking Co., 503 F. Supp. 2d 755 (E.D. Pa. 2007), the Eastern District of Pennsylvania observed that a “motion to strike class allegations under Rule 23(d)(4) seems, for all practical purposes, identical to an opposition to a motion for class certification.” Id. at 762. The Korman court denied the defendant’s motion to strike class allegations as premature, concluding that there was “no good reason for this case not to proceed down the normal path, i.e., with the Court setting a deadline for Plaintiff to file a motion for class certification and the parties litigating the propriety of maintaining the action as a class under the traditional Rule 23(c) rubric.” Id. at 763. Similarly, in NBL Flooring, Inc. v. Trumball Ins. Co., Civil Action No. 10–4398, 2011 WL 4481918 (E.D. Pa. Sept. 27, 2011), the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the
6

defendants’ motion to strike class allegations “because Defendants have not established that this case is among ‘the rare few where the complaint itself demonstrates that the requirements for maintaining a class action cannot be met.’” Id., at *1-2 (quoting Landsman & Funk PC, 640 F.3d at 93 n.30). In analyzing the issue, the NBL Flooring court cautioned that “[a] motion to strike should not be granted when it is in the nature of an opposition to class certification, or if discovery is a necessary prerequisite to determining whether class certification is appropriate.” Id., at *1.
Many other Third Circuit district court decisions also view pre-certification motions to strike class allegations as premature. See, e.g., Mills v. Serv. First Credit Union, Civil Action No. 4:11–CV–686, 2011 WL 3236313, at *1 (M.D. Pa. July 28, 2011) (concluding that “the instant case is not one of the ‘rare’ or ‘few’ cases in which the court should dismiss or strike class claims with no discovery, solely on the basis of the pleadings,” especially in light of the Third Circuit’s “emphasi[s] [on] the importance of discovery as part of the class certification process.”); Vlachos v. Tobyhanna Army Depot Fed. Credit Union, Civil Action No. 3:11–CV–0060, 2011 WL 2580657, at *2 (M.D. Pa. June 29, 2011) (denying defendants’ motion to strike class allegations as premature because the plaintiff had not yet moved for class certification); Martin v. Ford Motor Co., 765 F. Supp. 2d 673, 680-81 (E.D. Pa. 2011) (holding that “[i]t would be premature to address the merits of Defendant’s Motion [to strike class allegations] before a motion to certify a class is filed or even when discovery on this issue may be ongoing.”).
Courts have good reason to decline to hastily strike class action allegations early in the litigation life cycle. Specifically, unless the parties have completed discovery and at least one
7

party has moved for class certification, a court very rarely has the information necessary to
conduct the “rigorous analysis” inherent in the class certification decision. The Third Circuit
recently articulated its concern with premature class certification in Landsman & Funk PC v.
Skinder-Strauss Associates, 640 F.3d 72 (3d Cir. 2011). In Landsman & Funk, the Third Circuit
disapproved of the district courts’ premature class certification decision at the motion to dismiss
stage when there had been no motion for class certification and no discovery. See id. at 93. The
Landsman & Funk court reasoned that such an early, uninformed evaluation of class certification
in conjunction with a motion to dismiss did not comport with the “rigorous analysis” required to
resolve every class certification question:
To determine if the requirements of Rule 23 have been satisfied, a district court must conduct a “rigorous analysis.” In doing so, a “court may ‘delve beyond the pleadings to determine whether the requirements for class certification are satisfied.’”...In most cases, some level of discovery is essential to such an evaluation. In Weiss v. Regal Collections, 385 F.3d 337 (3d Cir.2004), we emphasized the importance of discovery as part of the class certification process. “It seems appropriate,” we said, “that the class action process should be able to ‘play out’ according to the directives of Rule 23 and should permit due deliberation by the parties and the court on the class certification issues.” Accordingly, “[a]llowing time for limited discovery supporting certification motions may ... be necessary for sound judicial administration.”
Landsman & Funk, 640 F.3d at 93 (internal citations omitted).
Here, Defendants have not convinced us that this is one of the rare cases in which we
should entertain a motion to strike class allegations before discovery even begins. As discussed
supra, Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges that the District operates pursuant to an “Automatic Autism
Transfer Policy” under which the District transfers autistic students from one school to another,
with little or no parental notice or involvement, more frequently than the District transfers non-
disabled students. Defendants vehemently deny the existence of any such policy, stating that
8

“plaintiffs use the phrase ‘Automatic Autism Transfer Policy’ to misdescribe that some schools have both the capacity and demand to accommodate autism support for all grades, while others have more limited capacity and demand and cannot accommodate autism support for all grades.” (Doc. No. 12, at 10). At this stage of the proceedings, we simply do not have the information necessary to analyze and resolve this factual dispute. The nature, existence, scope, and implementation of the so-called “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy”3 should certainly be considered in making a class certification decision in this matter, but the limited information available to us at this time curtails our ability to rigorously analyze the issue as required by Third Circuit law. See Landsman & Funk, 640 F.3d at 93.
Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’ claims are fundamentally unsuited to class-wide treatment. Specifically, Defendants argue that the relief Plaintiffs seek precludes class certification because the requested relief “boils down to forbidding any school that is incapable of offering autism support classes to all grade levels from offering [autism support] to any grade levels in that school, certainly not the desired outcome for all members of the class. This is especially true because this result will require the elimination of autism support classes in many neighborhood schools.” (Doc. No. 22-2, at 3-4). This argument fails to persuade us that Plaintiffs’ claims and requested relief are “fundamentally unsuited to class-wide treatment.”
As discussed supra, Plaintiffs request various forms of prospective relief, including a declaration that the “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” violates IDEA, Section 504, and the
3Even if the District does not have an official “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy,” discovery should still shed light on the frequency with which the District transfer autistic students vis-a-vis non-disabled students, as well as the procedure by which the District transfers students with autism. This information may very well inform our class certification analysis and decision.
9

ADA, and may no longer be used; and an order directing the District to create, maintain, and publicly disseminate a list of all the schools within the District that house any autistic support classroom; develop a new policy, with parental involvement, to provide continuity of programming for students with autism; and conduct IEP meetings, again with parental involvement, before reassigning a child with autism to another school (Doc. No. 1, at 21-22). Plaintiffs certainly do not explicitly request that we forbid “any school that is incapable of offering autism support classes to all grade levels from offering [autism support] to any grade levels in that school” or eliminate “autism support classes in many neighborhood schools.” Defendants merely speculate that forcing the District to change its practices regarding transferring autistic students will have the aforementioned results. Unlike Defendants, we will not jump to that conclusion at this time, early in the proceedings and before discovery has even begun.
Additionally, much of Plaintiffs’ requested relief focuses on providing parents of autistic children with more information and a greater opportunity to get involved with their children’s educational placement. We cannot see how this relief would divide the Plaintiffs’ proposed class to such an extent that an inherent conflict of interest among the class members would prohibit class certification. Parents may or may not take advantage of the opportunity to participate in the decisions that affect their children’s education. However, merely giving parents the option to do so, as well as the information necessary to make informed decisions, would not appear to be a particularly controversial or divisive issue among the autistic community.
For the aforementioned reasons, Defendants’ motion to strike the class action allegations is denied as premature. As such, the Court does not address the merits of Defendants’
10

substantive arguments regarding the Rule 23 requirements of numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy, cohesiveness, and predomination, at this time.
B. Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies Defendants challenge our subject matter jurisdiction in this case under Rule 12(b)(1), arguing that Plaintiffs have failed to exhaust their administrative remedies; Plaintiffs’ claims are moot because the District has offered the four (4) named plaintiffs placements in their preferred school; and Plaintiffs lack standing because they have suffered no injury. To withstand a Rule 12(b)(1) challenge to subject matter jurisdiction, “[t]he plaintiff has the burden of persuasion to convince the court it has jurisdiction.” Gould Elecs., Inc. v. Untied States, 220 F.3d 169, 178 (3d Cir. 2000). However, “[a] claim may be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(1) only if it ‘clearly appears to be immaterial and made solely for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction’ or is ‘wholly insubstantial and frivolous.’” Id. (quoting Kehr Packages, Inc. v. Fidelcor, Inc., 926 F.2d 1406, 1409 (3d Cir. 1991)). Preliminarily, we note that “[a] Rule 12(b)(1) motion may be treated as either a facial or factual challenge to the court’s subject matter jurisdiction.” Gould, 220 F.3d at 176. When considering a facial attack, we “only consider the allegations of the complaint and documents referenced therein and attached thereto, in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.” Id. Conversely, when evaluating a factual challenge to our subject matter jurisdiction, we “may consider evidence outside the pleadings.” Id. Here, Defendants introduced extrinsic materials to support their motion to dismiss, (see Doc. No. 11 Exs. A-F), and Defendants dispute the existence of the “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy.” Therefore, the Court will treat
11

Defendants’ 12(b)(1) motion as a factual attack and may consider materials outside the pleadings as appropriate.
We begin by considering Defendants’ exhaustion arguments. In general, those who wish to bring claims under IDEA must first exhaust their administrative remedies before bringing a civil action in federal court. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(i)(2)(A) (“Any party aggrieved by the findings and decision made under subsection (f) or (k) who does not have the right to an appeal under subsection (g), and any party aggrieved by the findings and decision made under this subsection, shall have the right to bring a civil action...”); 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l); Komninos v. Upper Saddle River Bd. of Educ., 13 F.3d 775, 778 (3d Cir. 1994) (declaring that “it is clear from the language of [IDEA] that Congress intended plaintiffs to complete the administrative process before resorting to federal court.”). Relatedly, when plaintiffs file a civil suit under the Constitution, the ADA, Title V of the Rehabilitation Act, or other federal laws protecting the rights of children with disabilities, seeking relief also available under IDEA, those plaintiffs must exhaust their IDEA-created administrative remedies “to the same extent as would be required had the action been brought under” IDEA. See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(l).
However, our courts have crafted certain exceptions to IDEA’s exhaustion requirement. Specifically, in the Third Circuit, claimants may bypass the administrative process: (1) where exhaustion would be futile or inadequate; (2) where the issue presented is purely a legal question; (3) where the administrative agency cannot grant relief; and (4) when exhaustion would work severe or irreparable harm upon a litigant. Beth V. v. Carroll, 87 F.3d 80, 88-89 (3d Cir. 1996). Additionally, federal court plaintiffs need not have exhausted their administrative remedies if “they allege systemic legal deficiencies and, correspondingly, request system-wide relief that
12

cannot be provided (or even addressed) through the administrative process.” Id. at 89. This exhaustion exception “flows implicitly from, or is in fact subsumed by, the futility and no-administrative-relief exceptions.” Id.
The question then becomes how to properly define “systemic.” The Third Circuit has not yet tackled the issue, but several courts have concluded that an IDEA claim is systemic “if it implicates the integrity or reliability of the IDEA dispute resolution procedures themselves, or requires restructuring the education system itself in order to comply with” IDEA, while a claim is not systemic “if it involves only a substantive claim having to do with limited components of a program, and if the administrative process is capable of correcting the problem.” Doe v. Ariz. Dep’t of Educ., 111 F.3d 678, 682 (9th Cir. 1997); MG v. Caldwell-West Caldwell Bd. of Educ., No. 09–1869, 2011 WL 2607523, at *7 (D.N.J. June 30, 2011) (citing Grieco v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., 2007 WL 1876498, at *6 (D.N.J. June 27, 2007)).
Here, two (2) of the named plaintiffs, P.V. and M.M., have sought and obtained at least some relief from an administrative hearing officer. The other two (2) named plaintiffs, J.V. and R.S., had not participated in a due process hearing before bringing this suit. Nevertheless, we find that the named plaintiffs in this purported class action need not exhaust their administrative remedies because “they allege systemic legal deficiencies and, correspondingly, request system-wide relief that cannot be provided (or even addressed) through the administrative process.” Beth V., 87 F.3d at 89.
To reach this conclusion, we first recognize that the “systemic legal deficiency / systemwide relief” exhaustion exception is simply a subset of the well-established “futility” and “no administrative relief” exceptions. See id. If an educational system is broken and requires a
13

system-wide fix that an administrative hearing officer cannot provide, then requiring plaintiff after plaintiff to exhaust his or her administrative remedy before filing suit would undoubtedly be futile. In this case, Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges that the District has an “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” pursuant to which the District improperly transfers students with autism without parental involvement and at a higher rate than the District transfers non-autistic students. Plaintiffs seek various forms of broad-based relief from this allegedly illegal Policy. Tellingly, the hearing officer in P.V.’s and M.M.’s administrative hearings explicitly stated that he “lacks authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures,” so he simply encouraged the District “to alter its procedures on a broader scope, if only to avoid a plethora of identical claims from similarly situated students.” (Doc. No. 1-4, at 15; Doc. No. 1-5, at 15).
These facts illustrate the prototypical case in which a court should permit IDEA plaintiffs to bypass IDEA’s administrative dispute resolution process. Two of the named plaintiffs, P.V. and M.M., sought and obtained some relief from an administrative hearing officer, but the hearing officer candidly admitted that he had no power to grant the kind of system-wide relief requested in this suit. Requiring P.V., or M.M., or J.V., or R.S., or any other autistic student in the District, to repeatedly ask an administrative hearing officer for broad-based, structural relief that he cannot provide seems wasteful and would ultimately prove fruitless. Additionally, if each autistic student with similar grievances “is forced to assert his or her claims through the administrative process, there is a high probability that there will be inconsistent results and the alleged ‘systematic’ deficiency” in the District’s procedures regarding autistic students will likely remain unaddressed and unresolved. N.J. Prot. & Advocacy, Inc. v. N.J. Dep’t of Educ., 563 F. Supp. 2d 474, 477-78 (D.N.J. 2008).
14

Relying on several district court decisions, Defendants argue that exhaustion is not futile “if the administrative process is capable of providing Plaintiffs form of relief.” See, e.g.,
some Brandon V. v. Chichester School Dist., Civil Action No. 06-4687, 2007 WL 2155722, at *5 (E.D. Pa. July 25, 2007); Hesling v. Avon Grove School Dist., 428 F. Supp. 2d 262, 275 (E.D. Pa. 2006) (concluding that “[i]n light of the availability of some of the relief sought, exhaustion is required.”). We believe Defendants stretch the “some form of relief” line of cases too far.
The Third Circuit has never endorsed the general proposition that IDEA claimants must exhaust their administrative remedies whenever the administrative process can grant some, but not all, of claimants’ requested relief. In fact, the “some form of relief” doctrine grew out of a district court’s attempt to distinguish the Third Circuit’s decision in W.B. v. Matula, 67 F.3d 484 (3d Cir. 1995), that exhaustion is not required when “the only relief sought-compensatory damages-was unavailable in the IDEA administrative proceedings.” See Hesling, 428 F. Supp. 2d at 274-76. Specifically, the Hesling court opined that the “Third Circuit's determination that exhaustion was excused in W.B. is not controlling here, as at least part of the relief sought by Ms. Hesling-declaratory relief for violation of her rights under the IDEA-is available through the statute’s administrative proceedings.” Id. at 275.
The Hesling decision makes sense when put in context. In W.B. v. Matula, the Third Circuit arguably left open the possibility that an IDEA claimant’s request for compensatory damages may be sufficient to escape IDEA’s exhaustion requirement. Such a result would incentivize enterprising IDEA plaintiffs to seek compensatory damages in an effort to improperly circumvent the exhaustion requirement. Read in this light, the Hesling court’s statement that
15

exhaustion is required if the administrative process can afford claimants some form of relief may be seen as an attempt to discourage this strategic behavior.
However, taken too far, the “some form of relief” doctrine would eviscerate the futility exception to exhaustion. Administrative hearing officers can almost always fashion some kind of relief for an IDEA claimant. Therefore, if we made IDEA claimants exhaust their administrative remedies every time the administrative process could provide the claimants relief, the
some futility exception would become a nullity. Additionally, the Supreme Court has made it clear that IDEA claimants “may bypass the administrative process where exhaustion would be futile or inadequate.” Honig v. Doe, 484 U.S. 305, 326-27 (emphasis added). If read broadly, as suggested by Defendants, the “some form of relief” line of cases would improperly run afoul of the Honig decision.
Here, even though an administrative hearing officer may be able to provide Plaintiffs with some of their requested relief, the hearing officer admittedly cannot order the District to make the structural changes to the District’s autistic student transfer procedures that Plaintiffs seek. Therefore, exhaustion would be “futile or inadequate,” Honig, 484 U.S. at 326-27, so Plaintiffs properly bypassed the administrative process in this case. Because we have excused Plaintiffs from pursuing their claims administratively, we need not, and do not, decide whether Plaintiffs have in fact adequately exhausted their administrative remedies.
C. Plaintiffs’ Claims Are Not Moot A case becomes moot “when the issues presented are no longer ‘live’ or the parties lack a legally cognizable interest in the outcome.” Donovan v. Punxsutawney Area Sch. Bd., 336 F.3d 211, 216 (3d Cir. 2003) (citation omitted). The heart of a mootness inquiry is whether the court
16

“can grant effective relief.” Id. More specifically, “an offer for the entirety of a plaintiff's claim will generally moot the claim.” Weiss v. Regal Collections, 385 F.3d 337, 342 (3d Cir. 2004). This flows naturally from basic mootness principles because parties do not have a “legally cognizable interest in the outcome” of a case once the alleged wrongdoer offers the aggrieved party complete relief.
In evaluating mootness, we must pay particular attention to circumstances in which the alleged wrongdoing recurs over a period of time. In particular, the Supreme Court has determined that a case is not moot if the conduct complained of is “capable of repetition, yet evading review.” Honig, 484 U.S. at 318-20 (citation omitted). For conduct to be “capable of repetition, yet evading review,” there must be a “reasonable expectation” or a “demonstrated probability” that the same controversy will recur. Id. at 318 n.6 (citation omitted). “This exception applies when (1) the challenged action [is] in its duration too short to be fully litigated prior to its cessation or expiration, and (2) there [is] a reasonable expectation that the same complaining party [will] be subjected to the same action again.” Diop v. ICE/Homeland Sec., No. 10–1113, 2011 WL 3849739, at *4 (3d Cir. Sept. 1, 2011) (citations omitted).
Courts have repeatedly denied mootness challenges to IDEA claims, concluding that the conduct giving rise to such claims is capable of repetition but evades review. See, e.g., LV v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ., No. 03 Civ. 9917, 2005 WL 2298173, at *5 n.4 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 20, 2005) (concluding “that defendants’ conduct fell within the ‘capable of repetition, yet evading review’ exception, such that there exists a ‘reasonable expectation’ that plaintiffs could be subject to the same conduct again based on (1) plaintiffs’ continued eligibility for educational services under the IDEA; (2) the nature of their disabilities; and (3) allegations that the delays are
17

due to defendants’ systemic failure to ensure timely enforcement”) (citation omitted); D.E.R. v. Bd. of Educ. of Borough of Ramsey, No. Civ.A.04-2274, 2005 WL 1177944, at *4-5 (D.N.J. May 18, 2005) (rejecting mootness challenge because “[a] school year is not long enough for the administrative due process and judicial review proceedings provided under the IDEA to take their course,” and “the determination of the least restrictive environment (‘LRE’) is an issue that must be addressed each time an IEP is prepared and has been a recurring issue throughout D.R.'s education.”); Coale v. State Dep’t of Educ., 162 F. Supp. 2d 316, 319 n.3 (D. Del. 2001) (recognizing that “[i]t is well established that the passage of the school year at issue does not moot an IDEA lawsuit. Due to the inevitable delays in litigation, a contrary rule would make the IDEA largely unenforceable. Thus, jurisdiction is deemed proper pursuant to the ‘capable of repetition yet evading review’ exception to the mootness doctrine.”).
Here, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs’ claims are moot because Defendants have offered all four (4) named plaintiffs a position in an autism support classroom in their preferred school. (Doc. No. 11, at 21). This argument fails in several respects. First, Defendants have not offered Plaintiffs complete relief because Plaintiffs seek much more than temporary placement at their preferred school. Plaintiffs also seek system-wide changes in the way the District operates with respect to autistic students. (See Doc. No. 1, at 21-23). Defendants have not offered Plaintiffs such broad-based relief, so Plaintiffs retain a “legally cognizable interest in the outcome” of this case. See Donovan, 336 F.3d at 216.
Second, Plaintiffs’ claims fall squarely within the special “capable of repetition, yet evading review” category of mootness cases. In general, educational placements remain in effect for only one school year. Therefore, the Plaintiffs in this case will be subject to the District’s
18

allegedly deficient autistic student placement policy each year. We agree with our sister courts in LV v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ., D.E.R., and Coale that we cannot likely resolve IDEA-based disputes of this kind within a school year, and concluding that such cases are moot would render IDEA largely unenforceable, at least with respect to claims of systemic wrongdoing. Since we have a “reasonable expectation” that the plaintiffs here will be subject to the same allegedly deficient “Automatic Autism Transfer Policy” year after year, and the challenged Policy will evade review due to the short amount of time between placements (one year), the Plaintiffs’ claims are not moot. See Honig, 484 U.S. at 318-20.
D. Plaintiffs Have Standing The three “irreducible” constitutional elements of standing are: (1) an injury in fact that is actual or imminent, not “conjectural” or “hypothetical”; (2) a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of—the injury must be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant; and (3) a showing that it is likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable decision will redress the injury. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560–61 (1992). Plaintiffs need not demonstrate actual harm or monetary damages to establish standing. On the contrary, “the actual or threatened injury required by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing.” Alston v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 585 F.3d 753, 763 (3d Cir. 2009). More specific to this matter, IDEA claimants who allege a statutorily deficient, systemic failure in educational policy have standing to challenge that policy because it will likely affect them year after year, until they complete their education. For example, in CG v. Commonwealth of Pa. Dep’t of Educ., No. 1:06-CV-1523, 2009 WL 3182599 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2009),
19

plaintiffs sought “an injunction requiring the Pennsylvania Secretary of Education to abandon the current funding formula and to distribute special-education funds based upon the actual number of disabled students and the actual cost of their special-education needs.” Id., at *2. The court held that the plaintiffs had standing because they alleged “that all Plaintiffs are subject to the systemic failure to provide FAPE caused by the funding formula.” Id., at *3. Similarly, the Eastern District of Missouri recently denied a motion to dismiss for lack of standing in a case in which the plaintiff alleged “past patterns of practice that have denied him access to a free appropriate public education and ongoing discrimination in education on the basis of his disability,” in the absence of evidence to the contrary. B.A. v. Missouri, No. 4:09CV1269, 2010 WL 1254655, at *4 (E.D. Mo. Mar. 24, 2010).
Here, Defendants argue that Plaintiffs do not have standing because (1) none of the Plaintiffs was transferred from his or her preferred school, negating any possible “injury in fact,” and (2) the District has offered Plaintiffs placement in their preferred school until the fifth grade, so any injury and associated relief would be merely speculative. This argument does not persuade us. As discussed supra, an imminent injury, including an imminent violation of statutory rights under IDEA, confers standing. See Alson, 585 F.3d at 763; CG, 2009 WL 3182599, at *3. Even though Plaintiffs currently attend their preferred school, Plaintiffs will continue to be subject to the District’s allegedly IDEA-deficient educational placement process from year to year. As such, Plaintiffs’ injuries are imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical, and a favorable court decision will likely redress the systemic failures, if any, in the District’s practices regarding the educational placement and transfer of autistic students. Therefore, under Lujan, Plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims.
20

E. Plaintiffs’ Claims Against Individual Defendants in Their Official Capacity Defendants ask us to dismiss all claims against the individual, official capacity defendants in this case as redundant of the claims against the District. We decline to do so at this time. To begin, we note that there is nothing inherently improper about naming both entity defendants and individual, official capacity defendants in an IDEA lawsuit. N.J. Prot. & Advocacy, 563 F. Supp. 2d at 491-92 (acknowledging “that in many circumstances it is appropriate for a plaintiff to assert IDEA and Rehabilitation Act claims against individuals in their ‘official capacities’ as school administrators, school district personnel, or school board members.”). While some courts have dismissed claims against individual, official capacity defendants as redundant, they have done so after satisfying themselves that the remaining entity defendant(s) were willing to take responsibility for the individual defendants’ action. See Blunt v. Lower Merion School Dist., 559 F. Supp. 2d 548, 567-68 (E.D. Pa. 2008) (dismissing individual defendants, in part because the “non-individual defendants do not seek to avoid liability by removing these individual defendants but instead acknowledge that any wrongdoing by those individual defendants is attributable to them.”). Additionally, retaining individual official capacity defendants in a case may streamline the discovery process. See Abdullajeva v. Club Quarters, Inc., No. 96 CIV. 0383, 1996 WL 497029, at *1-2 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 3, 1996) (noting that “[i]t is not anomalous to permit individuals to be named as defendants, even though no judgment can be collected from them,” in part because the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure facilitate discovery against parties). Here, the entity Defendant, The School District of Philadelphia, has not yet represented to the Court that the District will willingly accept the wrongdoing, if any, of the individual official
21

capacity Defendants, who are both School District officials. Therefore, it would be imprudent to dismiss Plaintiffs’ claims against the individual Defendants as redundant at this time. III. Conclusion
For the aforementioned reasons, Defendants’ motions to file reply briefs (Doc. No. 21, Doc. No. 22) are GRANTED. Defendants’ motion to strike class action allegations (Doc. No. 12) is DENIED, and Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is also DENIED.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.
22

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
The School District of Philadelphia, et al.
Defendants.

: CIVIL ACTION : : : : : : : : : NO. 2:11-cv-04027 : :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 31st day of October, 2011, upon consideration of (1) Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11), (2) Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 17), (3) Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. No. 21), (4) Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 21-1), (5) Motion by Defendants to Strike Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 12), (6) Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 18), (7) Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 22), and (8) Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 22-2), and in accordance with the reasoning set forth in the accompanying Memorandum, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1

1. Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint (Doc. No. 21) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter Doc. No. 21-1 as “Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.”
2. Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 22) is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter Doc. No. 22-2 as “Reply Brief in Support of Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Class Action Allegations.”
3. Defendants’ Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations (Doc. No. 12) is DENIED. 4. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11) is DENIED.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.
2

 
 Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 1 of 84
EXHIBIT 32

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 2 of 84
	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

1920	  Briarcliff	  Road	  NE	   Atlanta,	  GA	  30329-­‐4010	   404-­‐785-­‐5762	   404-­‐785-­‐9043	  fax	  
	  
ami.klin@emory.edu	   www.marcus.org	  
Ami	  Klin,	  Ph.D.	   Director,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	   Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta	   	   Professor	  and	  Division	  Chief	   Autism	  and	  Related	  Disorders	   Department	  of	  Pediatrics	   Emory	  School	  of	  Medicine	   	   Center	  for	  Translational	  	   Social	  Neuroscience	   Emory	  University	   	   Georgia	  Research	  Alliance	   Eminent	  Scholar	  
	  

DEVELOPMENTAL	  DISABILITIES	  CONSULTATION	  

Report	  issued	  on	  June	  8	  2012	  

	  

	  

	  

01.	  Background	  of	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Consultation:	  

	  

I	   have	   been	   retained	   by	   plaintiffs’	   counsel	   to	   provide	   opinions	   on	   certain	  

issues	   related	   to	   P.V.,	   et	   al.,	   v.	   The	   School	   District	   of	   Philadelphia,	   et	   al.,	   E.D.	  

Pa.	  Civil	  Action	  No.	  2:11-­‐cv-­‐04027.	  These	  issues	  include:	  

	  

a. Difficulty	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  (ASD)	  adjusting	  to	  

change	   in	   their	   environment	   and	   with	   transitions	   more	   generally.	   My	  

focus	   was	   on	   children	   with	   ASD	   attending	   kindergarten	   to	   grade	   8	  

levels	  of	  educational	  placement;	  

b. Consequences	  of	  unplanned	  transitions	  upon	  these	  children’s	  learning	  

ability	  and	  rate,	  and	  on	  behavioral	  challenges	  typically	  associated	  with	  

their	  condition;	  

c. The	   role	   of	   planning	   and	   preparation	   toward	   transitions	   and,	   more	  

generally,	   principles	   and	   standards	   known	   to	   attenuate	   deleterious	  

effects	  of	  change	  and	  transitions;	  and	  

d. The	   role	   of	   parents	   in	   the	   management	   of	   transitions,	   and	   more	  

generally,	   principles	   and	   standards	   associated	   with	   parental	  

involvement	   in	   the	   establishment	   of	   Individualized	   Education	  

Programs	  (IEP)	  and	  their	  implementation.	  	  

	  

My	   opinions,	   which	   are	   set	   forth	   more	   fully	   below,	   can	   be	   summarized	   as	  

follows:	   Based	   on	   my	   personal	   clinical	   experience,	   substantial	   literature	  

reviewed,	   and	   the	   materials	   made	   available	   to	   me	   on	   this	   case	   -­‐	   with	   a	  

reasonable	   degree	   of	   certainty	   and	   within	   the	   limitations	   also	   described	  

below	   -­‐	   the	   School	   District’s	   practices	   associated	   with	   the	   transitioning	   of	  

children	   with	   ASD	   from	   one	   educational	   setting	   to	   another	   appear	   to	   be	  

inconsistent	   with	   best	   practices	   and	   standards,	   and	   not	   appropriate.	   There	   is	  

concern	  that	  procedures	  for	  transitioning	  special	  education	  children	  with	  ASD	  

(1)	   do	   not	   reflect	   adequate	   parental	   involvement,	   and	   (2)	   are	   not	   evaluated	  

fully	   or	   managed	   proactively	   in	   compliance	   with	   the	   spirit	   of	   the	   relevant	  

statutes	  and	  in	  accordance	  with	  consensual,	  clinical	  science	  directives.	  	  

	  

The	   presentation	   of	   my	   opinions	   is	   organized	   in	   terms	   of	   the	   following	   order	  

of	   topics:	   a	   brief	   description	   of	   autism	   spectrum	   disorders,	   and	   of	   specific	  

issues	   related	   to	   change	   in	   their	   environment	   and	   transitions	   generally;	  

potentially	   deleterious	   impact	   of	   change	   and	   transitions	   on	   these	   children’s	  

learning	   performance	   and	   behavioral	   patterns;	   principles	   and	   standards	   for	  

management	   of	   transitions;	   the	   relationship	   between	   management	   of	  

11 	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 3 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

transitions	  and	  the	  IEP	  process;	  and	  the	  role	  of	  parental	  involvement	  in	  the	  IEP	  process.	  	   	   For	  the	  expression	  of	  my	  opinions	  I	  rely	  on	  my	  personal	  clinical	  experience,	  on	  pertinent	  clinical	   science	   literature	   found	   in	   peer-­‐review	   publications,	   on	   compilations	   of	   principles	   and	   standards	   of	   educational	   programming	   assembled	   by	   experts	   under	   the	   auspices	   of	   authoritative	   agencies	   charged	   with	   review	   and	   evaluation	   of	   extant	   clinical	   science	   literature	   on	   behalf	   of	   the	   community	   of	   clinical	   scientists,	   clinical	   service	   providers,	   educational	   professionals,	   and	   families	   impacted	   by	   ASD,	   on	   pertinent	   statutes	   and	   regulations,	   and	   information	  provided	  by	  plaintiffs’	  counsel	  as	  listed	  below.	  	   	   My	   personal	   experience	   comes	   from	   a	   27-­‐year	   history	   of	   involvement	   in	   clinical	   service	   provision	  and	  clinical	  investigation	  of	  ASD,	  beginning	  in	  graduate	  school	  in	  London	  (1983-­‐1988;	   PhD	  work	  at	  the	  Medical	  Research	  Council,	  Cognitive	  Development	  Unit,	  University	  of	  London;	   National	   Autistic	   Society	   and	   associated	   special	   schools	   for	   children	   with	   ASD,	   London	   and	   environs;	   Lauriston	   Road	   Residential	   Unit	   for	   Adults	   with	   Developmental	   Disabilities,	   Hackney,	   London),	   Autism	   Program	   at	   the	   Yale	   Child	   Study	   Center,	   Yale	   University	   School	   of	   Medicine	   (1989-­‐2010;	   Post-­‐doctoral	   fellowships,	   Professor	   and	   Director	   of	   Autism	   Program),	   and	   the	   Marcus	   Autism	   Center,	   Children’s	   Healthcare	   of	   Atlanta	   and	   Division	   of	   Autism	   &	   Developmental	   Disabilities	   at	   Emory	   University	   School	   of	   Medicine	   (2011-­‐present;	   Director,	   Professor	  &	  Division	  Chief).	  	   	   The	   2	   main	   authoritative	   compilations	   of	   principles	   and	   standards	   defining	   appropriate	   educational	  programming	  for	  children	  with	  ASD	  relied	  upon	  in	  this	  report	  are:	  	   	  
1) The	   report	   issued	   by	   the	   National	   Research	   Council,	   Committee	   on	   Educational	   Interventions	   for	   Children	   with	   Autism	   (NRC,	   2001).	   This	   committee	   was	   convened	   because	   of	   consensus	   that	   education,	   both	   directly	   of	   children,	   and	   of	   parents	   and	   teachers,	  is	  the	  primary	  form	  of	  treatment	  for	  ASDs.	  The	  education	  of	  children	  with	  ASD	   was	   accepted	   as	   a	   public	   responsibility	   under	   the	   Education	   for	   All	   Handicapped	   Children	   Act	   in	   1975.	   At	   the	   request	   of	   the	   US	   Department	   of	   Education’s	   Office	   of	   Special	   Education	   Programs,	   the	   National	   Research	   Council	   formed	   the	   Committee	   on	   Educational	   Interventions	   for	   Children	   with	   Autism	   and	   charged	   the	   committee	   to	   integrate	   the	   scientific,	   theoretical,	   and	   policy	   literature	   and	   create	   a	   framework	   for	   evaluating	   the	   scientific	   evidence	   concerning	   the	   effects	   and	   features	   of	   educational	   interventions	   for	   children	   with	   autism.	   Their	   primary	   charge	   focused	   on	   early	   intervention,	   preschool,	   and	   school	   programs	   designed	   for	   children	   with	   autism	   from	   birth	   to	   age	   8.	   The	   charge	   included,	   among	   others,	   the	   rights	   of	   children	   with	   autism	   under	  the	  Individuals	  with	  Disabilities	  Education	  Act	  (IDEA).	  This	  publication	  reviews	  the	   evidence	  and	  expresses	  conclusions	  and	  recommendations.	  	  
	   2) The	   report	   issued	   by	   the	   National	   Autism	   Center	   through	   their	   National	   Standards	   Project	   addressing	   the	   needs	   for	   evidence-­‐based	   practice	   guidelines	   for	   ASD	   (NAC,	   2009).	  This	  project	  was	  undertaken	  to	  compile	  and	  evaluate	  the	  evidence	  of	  treatment	  

2	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 4 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

and	  intervention	  practices	  for	  individuals	  with	  ASD.	  This	  project	  included	  review	  of	  775	  

intervention	  studies	  conducted	  from	  1957	  to	  2007.	  	  

	  

In	   addition,	   a	   sample	   of	   peer-­‐review	   research	   pertinent	   to	   the	   questions	   addressed	   in	   this	  

report	  was	  utilized	  to	  substantiate	  specific	  points	  addressing	  the	  questions	  of	  this	  consultation.	  	  

	  

I	   am	   compensated	   at	   the	   rate	   of	   $500	   per	   hour	   for	   my	   study	   and	   testimony	   in	   this	   case.	   My	  

hourly	  rate	  is	  not	  contingent	  on	  my	  opinions	  in	  this	  matter.	  	  

	  

	  

02.	  Documents	  Provided	  by	  Plaintiffs’	  Counsel:	  

	  

The	  following	  documents	  were	  provided	  by	  plaintiffs’	  counsel	  and	  reviewed	  by	  this	  consultant:	  

	  

#	  01:	  Complaint,	  P.V.,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  The	  School	  District	  of	  Philadelphia,	  et	  al.,	  dated	  June	  20,	  2011;	  

#	  02:	  Exhibit	  A	  to	  Complaint,	  Decision	  and	  Order	  P.V.	  Case,	  dated	  April	  15,	  2011;	  

#	  03:	  Exhibit	  B	  to	  Complaint,	  Decision	  and	  Order	  M.M.	  Case,	  dated	  April	  15,	  2011;	  

#	   04:	   Memorandum	   by	   Court,	   denying	   Defendants'	   motion	   to	   strike	   and	   motion	   to	   dismiss,	  

dated	  October	  31,	  2011;	  

#	  05:	  Defendants'	  Answer	  to	  Complaint,	  dated	  November	  14,	  2011;	  

#	  06:	  Declaration	  of	  Linda	  Williams,	  Deputy	  Chief	  of	  OSIS,	  dated	  February	  27,	  2012	  (OSIS:	  Office	  

of	  Specialized	  Instructional	  Services);	  

#	   07:	   Chart,	   DEF000993,	   produced	   by	   Defendants	   in	   discovery	   on	   February	   10,	   2012	   (students	  

with	  autism	  2008	  –	  2012);	  

#	  08:	  Special	  Education	  Facilities	  Master	  Plan,	  DEF006473,	  dated	  January	  14,	  2011,	  produced	  by	  

Defendants	  in	  discovery	  on	  March	  22,	  2012;	  	  

#	   09:	   Office	   of	   Specialized	   Instructional	   Services,	   Upper	   Level	   Transfers	   for	   September	   2011,	  

DEF006472,	  dated	  February	  2,	  2011;	  	  

#	  10:	  Excerpt	  of	  Hearing	  Transcript,	  including	  testimony	  of	  Cathy	  Roccia-­‐Meier	  and	  Leah	  Taylor,	  

dated	  December	  10,	  2010;	  

#	  11:	  Excerpt	  of	  Hearing	  Transcript,	  including	  testimony	  of	  Leah	  Taylor,	  dated	  February	  3,	  2011;	  

#	   12:	   Excerpt	   of	   Hearing	   Transcript,	   including	   testimony	   of	   Maria	   Monras-­‐Sender,	   dated	  

February	  4,	  2011;	  

#	   13:	   Excerpt	   of	   Hearing	   Transcript,	   including	   testimony	   of	   Carla	   Murphy	   and	   Maria	   Monras-­‐

Sender,	  dated	  February	  9,	  2011;	  

#	  14:	  A	  teacher's	  note	  received	  by	  the	  parent	  of	  a	  putative	  class	  member,	  PLF03037,	  dated	  May	  

9,	  2011;	  

#	   15:	   A	   letter	   received	   by	   the	   parent	   of	   a	   putative	   class	   member,	   PLF03038-­‐39,	   dated	   July	   1,	  

2011;	  

#	  16:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Heather	  Sanasac,	  dated	  April	  3,	  2012;	  

#	  17:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Kim	  Hunt,	  dated	  May	  11,	  2012;	  

#	  18:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Matthew	  Sanasac,	  dated	  April	  3,	  2012;	  

#	  19:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Maria	  Monras-­‐Sender,	  dated	  May	  10,	  2012;	  

#	  20:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Linda	  Williams,	  dated	  May	  21,	  2012;	  

#	  21:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Sharon	  Vargas,	  Parts	  I	  and	  II,	  April	  6,	  2012	  &	  May	  18,	  2012;	  

3	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 5 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

#	  22:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Yolanda	  Cruz,	  dated	  April	  12,	  2012;	  

#	  23:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Jane	  Cordero,	  dated	  May	  15,	  2012;	  

#	  24:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Cathy	  Roccia-­‐Meier,	  dated	  May	  16,	  2012;	  	  

#	  25:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Cecelia	  Thompson,	  dated	  May	  17,	  2012;	  

#	  26:	  Deposition	  Transcript	  of	  Lovlei	  L.	  McKinnie,	  dated	  May	  18,	  2012.	  

	  

	  

03.	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  and	  Problems	  with	  Transitions:	  

	  

	  

	  

Difficulties	  with	  Transition	  as	  a	  Defining	  Feature	  of	  Autism:	  

	  

Autism	   Spectrum	   Disorders	   (ASDs)	   are	   a	   family	   of	   highly	   prevalent	   neurodevelopmental	  

disorders	   of	   strongly	   genetic	   origins,	   which	   are	   marked	   by	   impairments	   in	   social	   and	  

communicative	   functioning,	   imagination	   and	   play,	   as	   well	   as	   repetitive	   behaviors,	   and	   narrow	  

interests	   and	   rigidities	   (Volkmar	   et	   al.,	   2005).	   There	   is	   great	   heterogeneity	   in	   the	   behavioral	  

manifestation	  of	  ASDs,	  covering	  the	  entire	  IQ	  range	  (from	  profound	  intellectual	  disability	  to	  the	  

gifted	  range),	  language	  range	  (from	  nonverbal	  to	  highly	  verbal),	  and	  social	  and	  communicative	  

ability	   range	   (from	   profoundly	   aloof	   to	   frequent	   but	   intrusive	   and	   non-­‐reciprocal	   approaches).	  

Despite	   the	   tens	   of	   genes	   already	   implicated	   in	   their	   etiology,	   ASDs	   are	   a	   well-­‐defined	  

syndrome	  (Jones	  &	  Klin,	  2009)	  and	  amongst	  the	  most	  well-­‐studied	  and	  reliably	  diagnosed	  of	  all	  

psychiatric	  disorders	  (Volkmar	  et	  al.,	  2004;	  Lord	  et	  al.,	  2012).	  	  

	  

From	  the	  time	  of	  its	  first	  description	  by	  Leo	  Kanner	  (Kanner,	  1943),	  there	  has	  been	  emphasis	  on	  

the	   rigidities	   displayed	   by	   children	   with	   ASD.	   In	   fact,	   in	   his	   description	   Kanner	   emphasized	   the	  

profound	  social	  and	  communicative	  disability	  (hence	  the	  Greek	  term	  “autism”),	  and	  a	  cluster	  of	  

behaviors	   that	   he	   captured	   under	   the	   term	   “insistence	   in	   sameness”.	   This	   term	   referred	   to	  

what	  now	  corresponds	  to	  the	  third	  cluster	  of	  defining	  symptoms	  of	  autism	  in	  DSM-­‐IV	  and	  ICD-­‐

10	   (Volkmar	   et	   al.,	   1994)	   –	   “Restricted	   repetitive	   and	   stereotyped	   patterns	   of	   behavior,	  

interests	   and	   activities”	   as	   manifested	   by	   encompassing	   preoccupations	   with	   stereotyped	   and	  

restricted	   patterns	   of	   interest,	   compulsive	   adherence	   to	   specific,	   nonfunctional	   routines	   or	  

rituals,	  stereotyped	  and	  repetitive	  motor	  mannerisms,	  and	  persistent	  preoccupation	  with	  parts	  

of	   objects.	   These	   defining	   features	   of	   autism	   encompass	   a	   wide	   range	   of	   challenges	   typically	  

displayed	  by	  children	  with	  ASD.	  Their	  “insistence	  in	  sameness”	  means	  that	  they	  have	  difficulty	  

with	   changes	   in	   their	   environment	   (e.g.,	   minor	   changes	   in	   familiar	   places	   or	   people),	   routines	  

(e.g.,	  changes	  in	  daily	  schedules),	  learned	  sequences	  of	  behavior	  and	  activity	  (e.g.,	  unexpected	  

alteration	   of	   a	   learned	   sequence),	   relationships	   (e.g.,	   changes	   in	   caregiving	   or	   educational	  

staff),	   among	   many	   aspects	   of	   their	   daily	   lives	   (Volkmar,	   Klin,	   Schultz	   &	   State	   2009).	   And	  

although	  the	  specific	  expressions	  of	  these	  rigidities	  vary	  from	  child	  to	  child,	  and	  typically	  takes	  

different	   manifestations	   associated	   with	   the	   child’s	   intellectual	   skills	   (Klin	   et	   al.,	   2007),	   it	   is	  

virtually	   universal	   among	   all	   individuals	   with	   ASD,	   though	   varying	   individually	   in	   terms	   of	  

intensity	   and	   disruptive	   impact	   on	   daily	   lives	   of	   the	   children,	   at	   school	   and	   at	   home.	   In	   school	  

life,	   these	   challenges	   typically	   impact	   on	   their	   ability	   to	   maintain	   attention	   without	   external	  

structure	  and/or	  supports,	  preference	  for	  only	  one	  or	  a	  few	  activities	  (and	  resistance	  to	  engage	  

in	   others),	   difficulty	   with	   transitions,	   changes	   in	   routine	   and	   unexpected	   events,	   difficulty	  

moving	  from	  one	  activity	  to	  another,	  and	  failure	  to	  pick	  up	  on	  the	  “gist”	  of	  a	  situation	  or	  activity	  

4	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 6 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

and	  consequent	  expressions	  of	  confusion	  and	  disruptive	  reactions	  (e.g.,	  tantrums)	  (Olley,	  2005).	  

The	   current	   definition	   of	   ASD	   in	   the	   IDEA	   regulations	   is:	   “Autism	   means	   a	   developmental	  

disability	   significantly	   affecting	   verbal	   and	   nonverbal	   communication	   and	   social	   interaction,	  

generally	   evident	   before	   age	   three,	   that	   adversely	   affects	   a	   child’s	   educational	   performance.	  

Other	   characteristics	   often	   associated	   with	   autism	   are	   engagement	   in	   repetitive	   activities	   and	  

stereotyped	   movements,	   resistance	   to	   environmental	   change	   or	   change	   in	   daily	   routines,	   and	  

unusual	   responses	   to	   sensory	   experiences”.	   (34	   CFR	   §	  300.8(c)(1);	   see	   also	   autism	   in	   DSM-­‐IV	  

and	   ICD-­‐10	   (Volkmar	   et	   al.,	   1994)).	   In	   the	   proposed	   DSM-­‐5	   criteria	   for	   ASD	   (APA,	   2011),	  

Criterion	  #	  2	  of	  Cluster	  B	  states	  “Excessive	  adherence	  to	  routines,	  ritualized	  patterns	  of	  verbal	  

or	  nonverbal	  behavior,	  or	  excessive	  resistance	  to	  change	  (such	  as	  motoric	  rituals,	  insistence	  on	  

same	  rote	  or	  food,	  repetitive	  questioning	  or	  extreme	  distress	  at	  small	  changes)”.	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Difficulties	  with	  Transition	  and	  Problem	  Behaviors:	  

	  

Problem	   behaviors	   of	   children	   with	   ASD	   are	   among	   the	   most	   challenging	   and	   stressful	   issues	  

faced	  by	  schools	  and	  parents	  in	  their	  efforts	  to	  provide	  appropriate	  educational	  programs	  (NRC,	  

2001).	   Problem	   behaviors,	   ranging	   from	   tantrum,	   to	   physical	   aggression,	   self-­‐injury	   and	  

property	  destruction	  are	  major	  barriers	  to	  effective	  social	  and	  educational	  development	  (NRC,	  

2001).	   Such	   behaviors	   put	   young	   children	   at	   risk	   for	   exclusion	   and	   isolation	   from	   social,	  

educational,	  family	  and	  community	  activities.	  Concerns	  about	  school	  behavior	  problems	  led	  to	  

new	   standards	   and	   procedures	   for	   discipline,	   student	   suspension,	   and	   expulsion	   in	   the	   1997	  

amendments	   to	   the	   IDEA.	   Specifically,	   the	   regulations	   include	   provisions	   for	   the	   use	   of	  

functional	  behavioral	  assessments	  and	  positive	  behavioral	  interventions	  and	  support.	  	  

	  

Understanding	  what	  causes	  these	  problem	  behaviors	  to	  emerge	  and	  what	  maintains	  them,	  and	  

what	   evokes	   their	   moment-­‐to-­‐moment	   expression	   has	   been	   the	   subject	   of	   a	   large	   number	   of	  

research	   studies	   (NRC,	   2001;	   Berkson	   &	   Tupa,	   2000).	   This	   area	   of	   research	   is	   critical	   because	  

once	  moderate	  to	  severe	  problem	  behaviors	  become	  an	  established	  part	  of	  a	  child’s	  repertoire,	  

children	  with	  ASD	  do	  not	  usually	  outgrow	  them	  without	  appropriate	  intervention,	  and	  they	  may	  

worsen	  (Schroeder	  et	  al.,	  1986).	  Typical	  behavioral	  challenges	  include	  aggression,	  destruction	  of	  

property,	   disruption	   of	   activities,	   self-­‐injury,	   stereotypic	   behavior,	   and	   inappropriate	   verbal	  

behavior	  (NRC,	  2001).	  	  

	  

While	  some	  of	  these	  behaviors,	  and	  particularly	  repetitive	  and	  stereotyped	  behaviors	  as	  well	  as	  

self-­‐injurious	   behaviors,	   may	   have	   constitutional	   origins	   (i.e.,	   organicity)	   (Symons	   et	   al.,	   1999;	  

Lewis,	   1996;	   Thompson	   et	   al.,	   1995),	   research	   on	   educational	   interventions	   for	   problem	  

behaviors	   has	   revealed	   specific	   triggers	   and/or	   ‘exacerbators’	   of	   disruptive	   behaviors	   in	  

children	   with	   ASD.	   Not	   unlike	   the	   finding	   by	   the	   School	   District	   involved	   in	   this	   case,	   which	  

conducted	   a	   functional	   behavior	   assessment	   (FBA)	   and	   concluded	   that	   transitions	   that	   are	  

unexpected	   can	   trigger	   outbursts	   (e.g.,	   Exhibit	   A	   to	   Complaint,	   Decision	   and	   Order	   P.V.	   Case,	  

para.	   19,	   dated	   April	   15,	   2011),	   the	   literature	   on	   problem	   behaviors	   and	   their	   adequate	  

management	   in	   school	   settings	   has	   also	   focused	   on	   the	   impact	   of	   unexpected	   change	   and	  

transitions	  on	  behavioral	  patterns	  of	  children	  with	  ASD	  (e.g.,	  Schreibman	  et	  al.,	  2000;	  Dettmer	  

et	   al.,	   2000;	   Briody	   &	   McGarry,	   2005).	   As	   a	   result	   of	   the	   consensus	   emerging	   from	   this	  

5	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 7 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

literature,	   the	   vast	   majority	   of	   evidence-­‐based	   treatments	   provide	   procedures	   for	   managing	   transitions,	   from	   activity	   to	   activity,	   from	   setting	   to	   setting,	   and	   from	   period	   of	   instruction	   to	   period	  of	  instruction	  (shorter	  or	  longer	  periods	  of	  time)	  (NRC,	  2001).	  While	  this	  focus	  existed	  in	   special,	   model	   treatments	   since	   the	   early	   1970’s,	   with	   IDEA’s	   directives	   of	   Free	   Appropriate	   Public	  Education	  (FAPE)	  in	  Least	  Restrictive	  Environments	  (LRE),	  and	  the	  resulting	  access	  gained	   by	  children	  with	  ASD	  to	  regular	  school	  setting,	  there	  was	  renewed	  interest	  in	  teaching	  children	   with	  ASD	  to	  transition	  smoothly	  across	  educational	  activities	  and	  settings	  (Wolery	  et	  al.,	  1998a,	   b;	  2002).	  The	  importance	  of	  this	  topic	  is	  summarized	  in	  a	  volume	  by	  Rous	  &	  Hallam	  (2006).	  This	   work,	  in	  this	  volume	  as	  well	  as	  more	  globally,	  as	  summarized	  in	  the	  consensual	  conclusions	  of	   the	   National	   Research	   Council	   (NRC,	   2001),	   focuses	   not	   only	   on	   child-­‐specific	   recommendations,	   but	   also	   on	   institutional	   ones,	   as	   the	   collaborative	   engagement	   of	   schools	   and	   their	   personnel	   is	   thought	   to	   be	   cardinal	   elements	   of	   effective	   procedures	   for	   managing	   transitions	  of	  children	  with	  ASD.	  	   	   When	  addressing	  disruptive	  behaviors	  by	  students	  with	  ASD,	  The	  NRC	  executive	  summary	  built	   on	   a	   vast	   and	   growing	   literature	   (e.g.,	   Dawson	   &	   Osterling,	   1997;	   Rogers,	   1998),	   bringing	   attention	   to	   elements	   of	   educational	   programming	   that	   need	   to	   be	   addressed	   in	   order	   to	   contextualize,	  and	  better	  manage,	  the	  challenges	  of	  these	  students	  (NRC,	  2001).	  Among	  these	   are:	   highly	   supportive	   teaching	   environments	   and	   generalization	   strategies;	   predictability	   and	   routine;	  a	  functional	  approach	  to	  problem	  behaviors;	  plans	  for	  transition	  from	  classrooms;	  and	   family	   involvement.	   Echoing	   a	   time	   in	   which	   children’s	   disruptive	   behaviors	   were	   discussed	   without	   a	   discussion	   of	   the	   educational	   environment	   and	   supports,	   the	   committee	   stated	   that	   “Programs	   that	   do	   not	   include	   these	   features	   should	   be	   re-­‐evaluated	   for	   suitability	   before	   discussing	  the	  ‘suitability’	  of	  the	  disruptive	  student”	  (p.	  120).	  	  	   	   Subsequent	   task	   forces	   in	   the	   US	   and	   in	   other	   countries	   made	   the	   same	   conclusions	   and	   recommendations.	  Attention	  to	  the	  management	  of	  transitions	  was	  emphasized	  in	  educational	   literature	  (e.g.,	  Iovannone	  et	  al.,	  2003),	  in	  large	  scale	  reviews	  of	  the	  clinical	  science	  literature	  in	   the	   US	   (NAC,	   2009),	   as	   well	   as	   in	   the	   UK	   (Charman	   et	   al.,	   2011).	   One	   key	   recommendation	   stated	  the	  need	  for	  effective	  transfer	  of	  information	  and	  knowledge	  about	  the	  pupil	  with	  ASD	  in	   the	  transition	  from	  primary	  to	  secondary	  school,	  and	  from	  school	  setting	  to	  school	  setting	  more	   generally.	  	   	   The	   centrality	   and	   importance	   of	   these	   principles	   have	   grown	   over	   the	   years	   in	   authoritative	   texts	  focused	  on	  educational	  programming	  for	  children	  with	  ASD.	  A	  recent	  compilation	  (Prelock	   &	  McCauley,	  2012)	  highlighted	  the	  increasing	  recognition	  in	  policies	  and	  research	  that	  parents	   must	   be	   at	   the	   core	   of	   all	   decision-­‐making	   about	   their	   children	   with	   ASDs	   (as	   previously	   emphasized	   in	   NRC,	   2001;	   Iovannone	   et	   al.,	   2003;	   NAC,	   2009);	   and	   that	   procedures	   for	   managing	   transitions	   are	   key	   standards	   of	   educational	   programming	   for	   children	   with	   ASD	   (as	   previously	   emphasized	   by	   a	   vast	   clinical	   science	   literature;	   e.g.,	   Dettmer	   et	   al.,	   2000;	   Briody	   &	   McGarry,	  2005;	  Schreibman	  et	  al.,	  2000).	  	   	   The	  standards	  for	  adequately	  managing	  transitions,	  though	  varying	  on	  the	  basis	  of	  the	  children	   served,	   all	   emphasize	   anticipation	   and	   preparation	   (Handleman	   &	   Harris,	   2000).	   This	   is	   usually	  

6	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 8 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

done	   as	   a	   process	   that	   occurs	   across	   the	   child’s	   last	   months	   prior	   to	   program	   exit,	   beginning	   with	  staff	  visits	  to	  future	  schools	  to	  assess	  the	  match	  of	  child	  with	  placement	  and	  to	  determine	   specific	   skills	   the	   child	   will	   need	   to	   function	   successfully	   in	   the	   next	   environment.	   Receiving	   teachers	   are	   invited	   to	   get	   an	   understanding	   of	   the	   child’s	   history,	   including	   responses	   to	   management	   and	   teaching	   characteristics,	   and	   follow-­‐up	   consultation	   is	   offered	   to	   receiving	   classrooms,	   among	   many	   other	   transition	   procedures	   (Handleman	   &	   Harris,	   2000).	   In	   the	   absence	   of	   these	   procedures,	   a	   whole	   range	   of	   results	   may	   occur:	   learning	   rates	   may	   slow	   down	   or	   the	   child	   may	   actually	   regress	   from	   achievement	   levels	   reached	   in	   the	   previous	   environment;	   management	   lessons	   accrued	   over	   the	   period	   of	   the	   child’s	   attendance	   to	   the	   previous	   environment	   (e.g.,	   from	   the	   teacher’s	   experience,	   from	   IEP	   discussions,	   from	   Functional	   Behavioral	   Assessments	   (FBAs))	   may	   not	   transfer,	   and	   in	   fact,	   the	   child’s	   behaviors	   may	   be	   exacerbated	   as	   old,	   maladaptive	   contingencies	   recur;	   and	   more	   generally,	   given	   the	   novelty	   of	   the	   physical	   environment,	   children	   “mix”,	   routines	   and	   procedures,	   all	   of	   which	   signifying	   major	   changes	   in	   the	   child’s	   rigid	   expectations,	   the	   likelihood	   of	   major	   disruption	   in	   positive	  adaptation	  and	  of	  exacerbation	  of	  maladaptive	  patterns	  of	  adaptation	  is	  great,	  and	  can	   pose	   a	   major	   threat	   to	   the	   child’s	   ability	   to	   fit	   in	   the	   new	   educational	   setting	   (Olley,	   2005;	   Handleman	  &	  Harris,	  2000;	  Prelock	  &	  McCauley,	  2012;	  NRC,	  2001).	  	   	   The	   clinical	   science	   literature	   on	   the	   association	   between	   transitions	   and	   behavioral	   problems	   in	  ASD	  is	  too	  voluminous	  to	  summarize	  here	  in	  greater	  detail.	  Equally	  large	  is	  the	  literature	  on	   strategies	   to	   manage	   transitions	   so	   as	   to	   minimize	   disruption	   and	   problem	   behaviors.	   But	   this	   literature,	   consensually,	   integrates	   several	   decades	   of	   research	   and	   its	   integration	   into	   educational	  practices	  in	  terms	  of:	   	   (1)	  a	  clear	  and	  frequent	  causative	  association	  between	  the	  characteristics	  of	  children	  with	  ASD	   and	  disruptive	  effects	  on	  learning	  and	  behavioral	  patterns	  related	  to	  transitions;	   (2)	   the	   importance	   of	   using	   consensual	   tools	   for	   managing	   and	   attenuation	   of	   the	   deleterious	   effects	  of	  transitions	  proactively,	  including	  parental	  involvement	  (discussed	  further	  below);	  and	   (3)	  the	  centrality	  of	  these	  considerations	  to	  compliance	  with	  IDEA	  statutes.	   	   (Sterling-­‐Turner	  &	  Jordan,	  2007;	  Prelock	  &	  McCauley,	  2012;	  Hume,	  2008;	  Dettmer	  et	  al.,	  2000;	   Flannery	  &	  Honer,	  1994;	  Flannery	  et	  al.,	  1995;	  Mesibov	  et	  al.,	  2005;	  Sainato	  et	  al.,	  1987;	  Schmit	   et	   al.,	   2000;	   Sterling-­‐Turner	   &	   Jordan,	   2007;	   McCord	   et	   al.,	   2001;	   Schreibman	   et	   al.,	   2000;	   Tustin,	  1995;	  Wilder	  et	  al.,	  2006).	   	   Both	  summarizing	  the	  preceding	  body	  of	  data,	  and	  presaging	  the	  thrust	  of	  educational	  research	   in	   the	   following	   decade,	   the	   NRC	   Committee	   stipulated	   the	   following	   quality	   indicators	   for	   programs	  serving	  children	  with	  ASD	  (NRC,	  2001):	   	   (1)	  child-­‐specific	  curricula;	  	   (2)	  highly	  supportive	  instructional	  environments;	   (3)	  maintenance	  and	  generalization	  strategies;	   (4)	  predictable	  routines;	   (5)	  functional	  behavior	  management	  procedures;	  

7	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 9 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

(6)	  systematic	  transitional	  planning;	  

(7)	  collaborative	  family	  involvement;	  

(8)	  family	  supports;	  

(9)	  low	  student-­‐to-­‐staff	  ratios;	  

(10)	  highly	  trained	  staff;	  

(11)	  comprehensive	  professional	  resources;	  and	  

(12)	  staff	  supervision	  and	  program	  review	  mechanisms.	  	  

	  

	  

04.	  Transitions,	  Problems	  Behaviors,	  and	  the	  Individualized	  Education	  Program	  (IEP)	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  Process:	  

	  

As	   summarized	   in	   the	   NRC	   document	   (NRC,	   2001),	   no	   single	   intervention	   has	   been	   shown	   to	  

deal	   effectively	   with	   problem	   behaviors	   for	   children	   with	   ASD.	   The	   consensus	   among	  

developmental,	   psychosocial,	   applied	   behavior	   and	   legal	   experts	   is	   that	   prevention	   of	   such	  

problems	  should	  be	  a	  primary	  focus	  (Berkson	  &	  Tupa,	  2000;	  Schroeder	  et	  al.,	  1986;	  Iovannone	  

et	   al.,	   2003).	   There	   is	   also	   a	   consensus	   that	   the	   most	   effective	   form	   of	   prevention	   of	   problem	  

behaviors	   is	   the	   provision	   and	   implementation	   of	   an	   appropriate	   Individualized	   Education	  

Program	   (IEP).	   In	   this	   way,	   plans	   and	   educational	   decisions	   build	   on	   the	   individual	   child’s	  

strengths	   and	   vulnerabilities,	   as	   well	   as	   the	   child’s	   patterns	   of	   responses	   to	   specific	   teaching	  

and	   management	   strategies.	   The	   NRC	   report	   also	   quotes	   a	   report	   by	   the	   New	   York	   State	  

Department	   of	   Health	   panel	   that	   developed	   the	   state’s	   Clinical	   Practice	   Guidelines	   for	   Autism	  

and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders	  (NYSD,	  1999):	  “The	  use	  of	  an	  ineffective	  assessment	  or	  

intervention	  method	  [is]	  a	  type	  of	  indirect	  harm	  if	  its	  use	  supplants	  an	  effective	  assessment	  or	  

intervention	  method	  that	  the	  child	  might	  have	  otherwise	  received”.	  	  

	  

The	   1999	   U.S.	   Department	   of	   Education	   Regulations	   for	   the	   1997	   Amendments	   to	   the	  

Individuals	   with	   Disabilities	   Education	   Act	   (IDEA)	   provides	   for	   scientifically	   supported	  

Interventions	   (e.g.,	   20	   U.S.C.	   §	  1400(4)).	   The	   IDEA	   further	   requires	   that	   schools	   must	   confirm,	  

before	  any	  changes	  of	  placement	  due	  to	  a	  behavioral	  problem	  can	  be	  considered,	  that	  the	  IEP	  

and	   placement	   were	   appropriate	   and	   that	   special	   education	   services,	   supplementary	   aids	   and	  

services,	   and	   behavior	   intervention	   strategies	   were	   provided	   consistent	   with	   the	   IEP	   and	  

placement	   (34	   C.F.R.	   §§	  300.523,	   1999;	   Turnbull	   et	   al.,	   1999).	   In	   summary,	   before	   assessing	  

deficiencies	  in	  a	  child	  who	  is	  displaying	  disruptive	  behaviors,	  it	  is	  critical	  to	  assess	  the	  adequacy	  

of	  the	  intervention	  program	  the	  child	  is	  receiving.	  IDEA	  requires	  that	  interventions	  must	  show	  

demonstrable	  benefits	  to	  be	  continued.	  For	  these	  conditions	  to	  hold,	  the	  IEP	  process	  needs	  to	  

be	  implemented,	  and,	  for	  a	  child	  about	  to	  move	  school	  setting,	  the	  transition	  elements	  of	  this	  

IEP	   need	   to	   be	   carefully	   conceived,	   in	   an	   individualized	   fashion,	   with	   participation	   of	   all	   those	  

pertinent	  who	  know	  the	  child	  well	  but	  certainly	  the	  teachers	  and	  parents,	  and	  with	  integration	  

of	   past	   information	   (e.g.,	   the	   corpus	   of	   evaluations	   and	   observations	   on	   the	   child	   in	   the	  

previous	   setting)	   and	   future	   setting	   (e.g.,	   an	   evaluation	   of	   the	   match	   between	   child	   and	   new	  

setting	  with	  full	  support	  of	  educational	  professionals	  who	  will	  take	  over	  the	  child’s	  educational	  

programming).	   In	   this	   context,	   it	   is	   worth	   re-­‐iterating	   the	   principles	   and	   standards	   of	  

appropriate	   programming	   highlighted	   by	   the	   NRC	   report	   and	   singled	   out	   in	   their	   executive	  

8	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 10 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

summary	  (NRC,	  2001,	  pp.	  119-­‐120),	  among	  which,	  the	  most	  pertinent	  to	  the	  current	  discussion	  

are:	  	  

	  

(1)	   Curriculum	   content	   that	   emphasize	   direct	   instruction	   in	   basic	   skills	   domains	   and	   abilities:	  

attending	   to	   elements	   of	   the	   environment	   that	   are	   essential	   for	   learning,	   especially	   to	   social	  

stimuli;	   imitating	   others;	   comprehending	   and	   using	   language;	   playing	   appropriately	   with	   toys,	  

and	  interacting	  socially	  with	  others;	  	  

(2)	  Highly	  supportive	  teaching	  environments	  and	  generalization	  strategies;	  

(3)	  Predictability	  and	  routine;	  

(4)	  Functional	  approach	  to	  problem	  behaviors;	  

(5)	  Plans	  for	  transitions;	  and	  

(6)	  Family	  involvement.	  

	  

None	  of	  these	  standards	  can	  be	  implemented	  without	  implementation	  of	  the	  IEP	  process	  in	  the	  

spirit	  of	  the	  statute	  and	  in	  the	  way	  that	  it	  is	  implemented	  in	  compliant	  school	  settings	  (i.e.,	  with	  

a	   focus	   on	   the	   individual	   child’s	   profile	   of	   strengths	   and	   weaknesses,	   and	   with	   parental	  

participation).	  	  

	  

Given	   the	   association	   between	   transitions	   and	   problem	   behaviors	   in	   children	   with	   ASD,	   the	  

implementation	  of	  the	  IEP	  process	  and	  its	  importance	  is	  further	  highlighted	  by	  considering	  one	  

key	  requirement	  of	  the	  IDEA	  statute.	  This	  point	  receives	  great	  attention	  in	  the	  NRC	  report	  (NRC,	  

2001).	   IDEA	   requires	   that	   if	   a	   child’s	   behavior	   impedes	   his	   or	   her	   learning	   or	   the	   learning	   of	  

others,	  the	  IEP	  team	  must	  consider	  strategies	  and	  supports	  to	  address	  that	  behavior	  (20	  U.S.C.	  

§	  1414(d)(3)(B)(i),	   1999;	   34	   C.F.R.	   §	  300.346(a)(2)(i),	   1999).	   As	   summarized	   by	   Turnbull	   and	  

colleagues	  (1999)	  for	  the	  NRC	  Committee	  (NRC,	  2001),	  these	  intervention	  and	  supports	  include:	  

	  

(1)	   systems	   change	   (e.g.,	   the	   process	   of	   considering,	   modifying,	   or	   substantially	   changing	   an	  

agency’s	  policies,	  procedures,	  practices,	  personnel,	  organization,	  environment,	  or	  funding);	  

(2)	   environmental	   alterations	   (including	   building	   on	   a	   child’s	   strengths	   and	   preferences,	  

connecting	  the	  child	  with	  community	  supports,	  increasingly	  the	  quality	  of	  the	  student’s	  physical	  

environment,	  making	  environmental	  alterations);	  

(3)	   skill	   instruction	   (consisting	   of	   instruction	   for	   both	   the	   student	   and	   those	   who	   interact	   with	  

him	   or	   her	   on	   the	   whole	   range	   of	   educational	   and	   social/communicative	   and	   adaptive	   goals);	  

and	  

(4)	   behavioral	   consequences	   (promoting	   adaptive	   behavior	   and	   minimizing	   disruptive	  

behavior).	  	  

	  

	  

05.	  The	  Role	  of	  Parental	  Involvement	  in	  the	  Individualized	  Education	  Program	  	   	  	  	  	  	  

	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  (IEP)	  Process:	  

	  

A	  key	  aspect	  of	  model	  programs	  of	  intervention	  in	  the	  country	  conceived	  in	  the	  1970’s	  through	  

the	   1990’s,	   as	   summarized	   by	   Handleman	   &	   Harris	   (2000),	   was	   families’	   active	   involvement	   in	  

their	   children’s	   intervention.	   This	   element	   takes	   different	   forms	   but	   typically	   includes	  

participation	   in	   individual	   meetings	   with	   professionals	   at	   the	   educational	   setting,	   some	  

9	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 11 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

instruction	   and/or	   training	   on	   promoting	   consistency	   of	   approaches	   across	   environments,	   and	  

pooling	   of	   information	   across	   settings	   in	   order	   to	   better	   inform	   –	   both	   the	   educational	  

professionals	   and	   the	   family	   –	   discussions	   on	   optimal	   strategies	   to	   promote	   learning	   and	  

decrease	  disruptive	  behaviors	  while	  advancing	  generalization	  of	  skills	  across	  settings.	  The	  NRC	  

Committee’s	   (NRC,	   2001)	   summary	   of	   this	   work	   concludes	   that	   all	   model	   programs	   reviewed	  

place	   a	   high	   priority	   on	   parental	   involvement	   in	   the	   education	   of	   their	   children	   with	   ASD,	   and	  

commented	   on	   the	   trend	   towards	   broadened	   parent	   supports	   reflecting	   the	   consensual	  

appreciation	  of	  the	  challenges	  faced	  by	  these	  families.	  	  

	  

This	   appreciation	   is	   also	   part	   of	   the	   IDEA	   statute,	   where	   parental	   participation	   is	   discussed	  

explicitly	   and	   in	   detail.	   Consistent	   with	   the	   literature	   on	   the	   importance	   of	   parental	  

involvement	   in	   programming	   for	   students	   with	   ASDs,	   parents	   are	   to	   be	   included	   in	   the	  

development	  of	  the	  Individualized	  Education	  Program	  (IEP),	  and	  all	  that	  it	  entails.	  	  

	  

The	  role	  of	  families	  and	  their	  effective	  participation	  in	  educational	  programming	  is	  reviewed	  in	  

great	   detail	   in	   the	   NRC	   report	   (NRC,	   2001):	   “Parents	   can	   learn	   to	   successfully	   apply	   skills	   to	  

changing	   their	   children’s	   behavior.	   Parents’	   use	   of	   effective	   teaching	   methods,	   support	   from	  

within	   the	   family	   and	   the	   community,	   and	   access	   to	   balanced	   information	   about	   ASD	   and	   the	  

range	   of	   appropriate	   services	   can	   contribute	   to	   successful	   child	   and	   family	   functioning.	   It	   is	  

crucially	   important	   to	   make	   information	   available	   to	   parents	   to	   ensure	   their	   active	   role	   in	  

advocacy	   for	   their	   children’s	   education”	   (p.	   4	   of	   the	   Executive	   Summary;	   NRC,	   2001).	   Their	  

recommendation	   is	   expressed	   thus:	   “The	   committee	   recommends	   that	   families’	   participation	  

should	   be	   supported	   in	   education	   through	   consistent	   presentation	   of	   information	   by	   local	  

school	  systems,	  through	  ongoing	  consultation	  and	  individualized	  problem	  solving,	  and	  through	  

the	   opportunity	   to	   learn	   techniques	   for	   teaching	   their	   children	   new	   skills	   and	   reducing	  

behavioral	   problems.	   Although	   families	   should	   not	   be	   expected	   to	   provide	   the	   majority	   of	  

educational	  programming	  for	  their	  child,	  the	  parents’	  concerns	  and	  perspectives	  should	  actively	  

help	   shape	   educational	   planning”	   (p.	   4	   of	   the	   Executive	   Summary;	   NRC,	   2001).	   These	  

conclusions	   are	   based	   on	   a	   large	   body	   of	   literature	   on	   parental	   involvement	   in	   ASD	   children’s	  

educational	   and	   treatment	   planning.	   This	   literature	   spans	   the	   areas	   of	   advocacy,	   fostering	  

generalization	  of	  skills,	  addressing	  and	  managing	  problem	  behaviors,	  attenuating	  the	  effects	  of	  

transitions,	  generating	  a	  comprehensive	  view	  of	  the	  child	  beneficial	  to	  families	  and	  educational	  

professionals	  alike,	  among	  many	  others	  (several	  chapters	  of	  this	  compilation	  include	  pertinent	  

discussion	  on	  this	  topic;	  Volkmar	  et	  al.,	  2005).	  	  

	  

	  

06.	  Unplanned	  Transitions	  and	  the	  Individualized	  Education	  Program	  (IEP)	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  Process:	  

	  

The	  requirements	  for	  determining	  the	  placement	  of	  a	  child	  with	  a	  disability	  are	  included	  in	  the	  

IDEA	  Part	  B	  regulations	  at	  34	  CFR	  §§	  300.114	  through	  300.118.	  These	  regulations	  provide	  that	  

to	   the	   maximum	   extent	   appropriate,	   children	   with	   disabilities,	   including	   in	   public	   or	   private	  

institutions	  or	  other	  care	  facilities,	  are	  to	  be	  educated	  with	  children	  who	  are	  not	  disabled	  and	  

that	   special	   classes,	   separate	   schooling	   or	   other	   removal	   of	   children	   with	   disabilities	   from	   the	  

regular	   educational	   environment	   occurs	   only	   if	   the	   nature	   or	   severity	   of	   the	   disability	   is	   such	  

10	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 12 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

that	   education	   in	   regular	   classes	   with	   the	   use	   of	   supplementary	   aids	   and	   services	   cannot	   be	   achieved	   satisfactorily.	   These	   regulations	   also	   require	   that	   the	   placement	   decision	   for	   each	   child	  be	  made	  by	  a	  group	  of	  persons,	  including	  the	  parents,	  and	  other	  persons	  knowledgeable	   about	   the	   child,	   the	   meaning	   of	   the	   evaluation	   data,	   and	   the	   placement	   options.	   A	   child’s	   placement	  must	  be	  determined	  on	  an	  individual,	  case-­‐by-­‐case	  basis,	  depending	  on	  each	  child’s	   unique	   needs	   and	   circumstances,	   made	   at	   least	   annually,	   based	   on	   the	   child’s	   Individualized	   Education	  Program	  (IEP),	  and	  be	  as	  close	  as	  possible	  to	  the	  child’s	  home.	  Recognizing	  that	  there	   is	   no	   “one	   size	   fits	   all”	   approach,	   and	   that	   placements	   in	   regular	   classes	   may	   not	   be	   the	   least	   restrictive	   placement	   for	   every	   child	   with	   a	   disability,	   the	   IDEA	   regulations	   specify	   that	   each	   public	  agency	  is	  to	  ensure	  that	  a	  continuum	  of	  alternative	  placements	  (including	  instruction	  in	   regular	   classes,	   special	   classes,	   special	   schools,	   home	   instruction,	   and	   instruction	   in	   hospitals	   and	  institutions)	  is	  available	  to	  meet	  the	  needs	  of	  children	  with	  disabilities	  for	  special	  education	   and	  related	  services.	  	  	   	   As	   these	   regulations	   make	   clear,	   placement	   decisions	   must	   be	   made	   on	   an	   individual	   basis.	  	   Placements	   that	   are	   determined	   based	   solely	   on	   the	   category	   of	   a	   child’s	   disability	   are	   not	   consistent	  with	  the	  regulations.	  A	  child	  may	  be	  placed	  in	  a	  special	  purpose	  school	  for	  students	   with	   ASD	   only	   if	   the	   placement	   team,	   consistent	   with	   34	   CFR	   §§	   300.114	   through	   300.117,	   determines	   that	   placement	   to	   be	   necessary	   to	   meet	   the	   needs	   of	   that	   child	   and	   that	   the	   child	   cannot	  be	  educated	  satisfactorily	  in	  a	  less	  restrictive	  setting,	  even	  with	  the	  use	  of	  appropriate	   supplementary	  aids	  and	  services.	  	   	   In	   the	   context	   of	   this	   consultation,	   there	   are	   some	   points	   to	   highlight	   in	   regards	   to	   placement	   decisions.	   A	   blanket	   policy	   that	   children	   with	   ASD	   are	   to	   be	   placed	   in	   a	   given	   “autism-­‐ready	   school”	  or	  another	  school	  from	  year	  to	  year	  means	  that	  they	  are	  not	  being	  programmed	  for	  as	   individual	   learners.	   These	   children	   are	   entitled	   to	   receive	   Free	   Appropriate	   Public	   Education	   (FAPE)	  in	  the	  Least	  Restrictive	  Environment	  (LRE).	  If	  this	  environment	  is	  judged	  not	  to	  be	  their	   home	   school,	   this	   decision,	   per	   IDEA,	   has	   to	   be	   based	   on	   having	   substantiated	   that	   the	   child	   cannot	  learn	  appropriately	  with	  the	  use	  of	  supplementary	  aid	  and	  services,	  as	  outlined	  in	  Part	  B	   of	  IDEA.	  These	  determinations	  cannot	  be	  made	  outside	  the	  IEP	  process,	  and,	  therefore,	  need	  to	   be	  in	  compliance	  with	  the	  IEP	  elements	  of	  the	  IDEA	  statutes,	  which	  is	  in	  accord	  with	  pertinent	   clinical	   science	   literature.	   In	   summary,	   significant	   unplanned	   transitions,	   defined	   here	   as	   transitions	   that	   do	   not	   comply	   with	   discussions	   and	   determinations	   by	   the	   IEP	   team,	   are	   inconsistent	  with	  the	  IEP	  statutes’	  language,	  spirit,	  and	  goals.	  By	  these	  statutes,	  consistent	  with	   clinical	  science	  literature,	  parental	  involvement	  is	  an	  essential	  element	  of	  the	  IEP	  process.	  And,	   as	  the	  literature	  above	  points	  out,	  the	  IEP	  process	  not	  only	  determines	  a	  child’s	  needs	  relative	   to	  an	  undetermined	  future	  program,	  but,	  in	  order	  to	  consider	  the	  potentially	  deleterious	  effects	   of	  transitions,	  the	  IEP	  process	  also	  considers	  the	  adequacy	  of	  placements	  AND	  operationalizes	  a	   plan	  for	  achieving	  successful	  transitions.	  	   	   Finally,	  as	  part	  of	  the	  review	  of	  materials	  provided	  by	  plaintiffs’	  counsel,	  I	  had	  the	  opportunity	   to	   read	   Ms.	   Williams’s	   declaration	   and	   deposition.	   Although	   these	   materials	   provided	   some	   information	   about	   the	   organizational	   structure	   for	   decisions	   on	   special	   education	   placements	   carried	  out	  in	  the	  School	  District,	  there	  was	  no	  information	  on	  content	  or	  procedures	  assuring	  

11	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 13 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

that	   transitions	   decided	   upon	   for	   special	   education	   children	   with	   ASD	   (1)	   both	   involved	   and	   were	  fully	  discussed	  with	  parents,	  and	  (2)	  were	  a.	  evaluated	  fully,	  b.	  managed	  proactively,	  and	   c.	   thoughtfully	   executed,	   in	   compliance	   with	   the	   IEP	   statute’s	   spirit	   and	   procedural	   recommendations	   as	   well	   as	   with	   the	   NRC	   recommendations	   (NRC,	   2001).	   In	   fact,	   Ms.	   Williams’s	   declaration	   and	   deposition	   affirmatively	   suggest	   parents	   are	   not	   meaningfully	   involved	   in	   significant	   unplanned	   transitions.	   Although,	   clearly,	   I	   have	   not	   evaluated	   the	   children’s	  actual	  transitions	  (e.g.,	  making	  direct	  observations	  of	  children	  and	  of	  classrooms),	  the	   parents’	   depositions	   point	   to	   their	   strong	   perceptions	   and	   observations	   indicating	   that	   the	   proposed	  transitions	  were	  managed	  very	  poorly	  (even	  when	  transitions	  did	  not	  occur	  because	   of	  the	  “stay	  put”	  statute).	  According	  to	  the	  parents’	  depositions,	  transitions	  were	  announced	  in	   a	   surprising,	   haphazard	   and	   unsupported	   fashion,	   creating	   hardships	   for	   children	   and	   families	   alike,	   and	   failing	   to	   support	   sending	   and	   receiving	   teachers	   (who	   presumably	   were	   critically	   aware	  of	  a.	  the	  importance	  of	  standards	  and	  procedures	  described	  above	  in	  this	  report,	  and	  b.	   are	  critically	  aware	  of	  the	  potentially	  disruptive	  effects	  upon	  all	  concerned	  associated	  with	  not	   following	   these	   recommendations).	   In	   sum,	   as	   explained	   above,	   the	   School	   District’s	   practices	   associated	  with	  the	  transitioning	  of	  children	  with	  ASD	  from	  one	  educational	  setting	  to	  another	   appear	  to	  be	  inconsistent	  with	  best	  practices	  and	  standards,	  and	  not	  appropriate.	   	   I	   remain	   available	   to	   address	   any	   further	   questions	   related	   to	   the	   topics	   of	   this	   consultation,	   and	  appreciate	  the	  opportunity	  to	  try	  and	  contribute	  to	  this	  important	  discussion.	  	   	   I	   declare	   under	   penalty	   of	   perjury	   that	   the	   foregoing	   is	   true	   and	   correct.	   	   Executed	   on	   June	   8,	   2012.	   	  

	   	  

Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

Director,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center,	  Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta	  

Georgia	  Research	  Alliance	  Eminent	  Scholar	  Professor	  &	  Chief,	  Division	  of	  Autism	  &	  Related	  

Disorders	  

Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Emory	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

12	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 14 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

	  

	  

	  References	  Cited:	  

	  

	   APA	  (2011).	  American	  Psychiatric	  Association,	  DSM-­‐5	  Proposed	  Revision	  of	  Criteria	  for	  Autism	  

	  

Spectrum	  Disorder.	  Arlington,	  VA.	  

	  

http://www.dsm5.org/proposedrevisions/pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=94	  	  

	  

	  

Berkson	  G.,	  &	  M.	  Tupa	  (2000).	  Early	  development	  of	  stereotyped	  and	  self-­‐injurious	  behaviors.	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Early	  Intervention,	  23(1),	  1-­‐19.	  

	  

	  

Briody,	  J.,	  &	  McGarry,	  K.	  (2005).	  Using	  social	  stories	  to	  ease	  children’s	  transitions.	  Young	  	  

	   	   Children,	  60,	  38–43.	  

	  

Charman,	  T.,	  Pellicano,	  L.,	  Peacey,	  L.	  V.,	  &	  Peacey,	  N.	  (2011).	  Centre	  for	  Research	  in	  Autism	  and	  	  

	   	   Education,	  Department	  of	  Psychology	  &	  Human	  Development,	  Institute	  of	  Education.	  	  

	   	   What	  is	  good	  practice	  in	  autism	  education?	  London:	  University	  of	  London.	  	  

	  

Dawson,	  G.,	  &	  Osterling,	  J.	  (1997).	  Early	  intervention	  in	  autism:	  Effectiveness	  and	  common	  	  

	   	   elements	  of	  current	  approaches.	  In	  M.	  J.	  Guralnick	  (ed).	  The	  Effectiveness	  of	  Early	  	  

	   	   Intervention:	  Second	  Generation	  Research	  (pp.	  307-­‐326).	  Baltimore,	  MD:	  Paul	  H.	  Brookes	  

	   	   Publishing.	  

	  

Dettmer,	  S.,	  Simpson,	  R.,	  Myles,	  B.,	  &	  Ganz,	  J.	  (2000).	  The	  use	  of	  visual	  supports	  to	  facilitate	  	  

	   	   transitions	  of	  students	  with	  autism.	  Focus	  on	  Autism	  and	  Other	  Developmental	  	   	  

	   	   Disabilities,	  15(3),	  163–169.	  

	  

Flannery,	  K.	  B.,	  O’Neill,	  R.	  E.,	  &	  Horner,	  R.	  H.	  (1995).	  Including	  predictability	  in	  functional	  	  

	  

assessment	  and	  individual	  program	  development.	  Education	  and	  Treatment	  of	  Children,	  

	  

18,	  498–	  509.	  

	  

	  

Flannery,	  K.	  &	  Horner,	  R.	  (1994).	  The	  relationship	  between	  predictability	  and	  problem	  behavior	  

	  

for	  students	  with	  severe	  disabilities.	  Journal	  of	  Behavioral	  Education,	  4,	  157-­‐176.	  

	  

	  

Handleman,	  J.	  S.,	  &	  Harris,	  S.	  (2000).	  Preschool	  Education	  Programs	  for	  Children	  with	  Autism,	  

	  

2nd	  edition.	  Austin,	  TX:	  Pro-­‐Ed.	  

	  

	  

Hume,	  K.	  (2008).	  Transition	  Time:	  Helping	  Individuals	  on	  the	  Autism	  Spectrum	  move	  

	  

successfully	  from	  one	  activity	  to	  another.	  The	  Report,	  13(2),	  6-­‐10.	  	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2009).	  Heterogeneity	  and	  homogeneity	  across	  the	  autism	  spectrum:	  the	  

	  

role	  of	  development.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  48(5),	  471-­‐3.	  

	  

13	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 15 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

	  

Kanner,	  L.	  (1943).	  Autistic	  disturbances	  of	  affective	  contact.	  Nervous	  Child,	  2,	  217–250.	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Danovitch,	  J.	  H.,	  Dohrmann,	  E.	  H.,	  Merz,	  A.	  B.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2007).	  Circumscribed	  

	  

interests	  in	  higher-­‐functioning	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  an	  

	  

exploratory	  study.	  	  Research	  and	  Practice	  for	  Persons	  with	  Severe	  Disabilities,	  32(2),	  89-­‐

	  

100.	  	  

	  

	  

Lewis,	  M.H.	  (1996).	  Psychopharmacology	  of	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  26(2),	  231-­‐235.	  

	  

	  

Lord,	  C.,	  Petrova.,	  E.	  Hus,	  V.,	  Gan,	  W.,	  Lu,	  F.	  et	  al.	  (2012).	  A	  multiside	  study	  of	  the	  clinical	  

	  

diagnosis	  of	  different	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  69(3),	  

	  

306-­‐13.	  

	  

	  

Lovannone,	  R.,	  Dunlap,	  G.,	  Huber,	  H.,	  &	  Kincaid,	  D.	  (2003).	  Effective	  educational	  practices	  for	  

	  

students	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Focus	  on	  Autism	  and	  Other	  Developmental	  

	  

Disabilities,	  18(3),	  150–165.	  

	  

McCord,	  B.	  E.,	  Thomson,	  R.	  J.,	  &	  Iwata,	  B.	  A.	  (2001).	  Functional	  Analysis	  and	  Treatment	  of	  Self-­‐

	  

Injury	  Associated	  with	  Transitions.	  Journal	  of	  Applied	  Behavior	  Analysis,	  34(2),	  195-­‐210.	  	  

	  

	  

Mesibov,	  G.,	  Shea,	  V.,	  &	  Schopler,	  E.	  (2005).	  The	  TEACCH	  approach	  to	  autism	  spectrum	  

	  

disorders.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Plenum	  Publishers.	  

	  

	  

NAC	  (2009).	  National	  Autism	  Center:	  National	  Standards	  Project—findings	  and	  conclusions:	  

	  

Addressing	  the	  needs	  for	  evidence-­‐based	  practice	  guidelines	  for	  autism	  spectrum	  

	  

disorders.	  Randolph,	  MA.	  

	  

NRC	  (2001).	  National	  Research	  Council,	  Committee	  on	  Educational	  Interventions	  for	  Children	  

with	  Autism,	  Division	  of	  Behavioral	  and	  Social	  Sciences	  and	  Education.	  Lord,	  C.	  &	  

McGee,	  J.	  P.	  (Eds.).	  Educating	  Children	  with	  Autism.	  Washington,	  DC:	  National	  Academy	  

Press.	  (NRC).	  

	  

NYSDH	  (1999).	  New	  York	  State	  Department	  of	  Health:	  Clinical	  Practice	  Guideline,	  Report	  of	  the	  

Guideline	  Recommendations,	  Autism/Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders.	  

http://www.health.ny.gov/community/infants_children/early_intervention/disorders/a

utism/	  	  

	  

	  

Olley,	  G.	  (2005).	  Curriculum	  and	  Classroom	  Structure.	  In	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.	  J.	  

	  

Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition,	  

	  

Volume	  2	  (pp.	  863-­‐881).	  	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Prelock,	  P.	  A.,	  &	  McCauley,	  R.	  J.	  (2012).	  Treatment	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  evidence-­‐	  

	   	   based	  intervention	  strategies	  for	  communication	  and	  social	  interactions.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  	  

14	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 16 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

	   	   Paul	  H.	  Brookes	  Publishing	  Company.	  	  

	  

Rogers,	  S.	  J.	  (1998).	  Empirically	  supported	  comprehensive	  treatments	  for	  young	  children	  with	  

	   autism.	  Journal	  of	  Clinical	  Child	  Psychology,	  27,	  168-­‐179.	  

	  

	  

Rous,	  B.	  S.,	  &	  Hallam,	  R.	  A.	  (2006).	  Tools	  for	  transition	  in	  early	  childhood:	  a	  step-­‐by-­‐step	  guide	  

	  

for	  agencies,	  teachers,	  and	  families.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Brookes	  Publishing.	  

	  

	  

Sainato,	  D.,	  Strain,	  P.,	  Lefebvre,	  D.,	  &	  Rapp,	  N.	  (1987).	  Facilitating	  transition	  times	  with	  

	  

handicapped	  preschool	  children:	  A	  comparison	  between	  peer	  mediated	  and	  antecedent	  

	  

prompt	  procedures.	  Journal	  of	  Applied	  Behavior	  Analysis,	  20,	  285-­‐291.	  

	  

	  

Schmit,	  J.,	  Alper,	  S.,	  Raschke,	  D.,	  &	  Ryndak,	  D.	  (2000).	  Effects	  of	  using	  a	  photographic	  cueing	  

	  

package	  during	  routine	  school	  transitions	  with	  a	  child	  who	  has	  autism.	  Mental	  

	  

Retardation,	  38,	  131-­‐137.	  

	  

	  

Schreibman,	  L.,	  Whalen,	  C.,	  &	  Stahmer,	  A.	  C.	  (2000).	  The	  use	  of	  video	  priming	  to	  reduce	  	  	  

	   	   disruptive	  transition	  behavior	  in	  children	  with	  autism.	  Journal	  of	  Positive	  Behavior	  	  

	   	   Interventions,	  2(1),	  3–11.	  

	  

Schroeder,	  S.	  R.,	  Bickel,	  W.	  K.	  &	  Richmond,	  G.	  (1986).	  Primary	  and	  secondary	  prevention	  of	  self-­‐

	  

injurious	  behaviors:	  A	  life-­‐long	  problem.	  Advances	  in	  Learning	  and	  Behavioral	  

	  

Disabilities,	  5,	  63-­‐85.	  

	  

	  

Sterling-­‐Turner,	  H.	  E.	  &	  	  Jordan,	  S.	  S.	  (2007).	  Interventions	  addressing	  transition	  difficulties	  for	  

	  

individuals	  with	  autism.	  Psychology	  in	  the	  Schools,	  Special	  Issue:	  Autism	  Spectrum	  

	  

Disorders,	  4(7),	  681–690.	  	  

	  

	  

Symons,	  F.	  J.,	  Butler,	  M.	  G.,	  Sanders,	  M.	  D.,	  Feurer,	  I.	  D.,	  &	  Thompson,	  T.	  (1999).	  Self	  injurious	  

	  

behavior	  and	  Prader-­‐Willi	  syndrome:	  Behavioral	  forms	  and	  body	  locations.	  American	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Mental	  Retardation,	  104(3),	  260-­‐269.	  

	  

	  

Thompson,	  T.,	  Symons,	  F.,	  Delaney,	  D.	  &	  England,	  C.	  (1995).	  Self-­‐injurious	  behavior	  as	  

	  

endogenous	  neurochemical	  self-­‐administration.	  Mental	  Retardation	  and	  Developmental	  

	  

Disabilities	  Research	  Reviews,	  1(2),	  137-­‐148.	  

	  

	  

Turnbull,	  H.	  R.,	  Wilcox,	  B.	  L.	  &	  Stowe,	  M.	  J.	  (December,	  1999).	  A	  Brief	  Overview	  of	  Special	  

	  

Education	  Law	  with	  Focus	  on	  Autism.	  Paper	  presented	  at	  the	  First	  Workshop	  of	  the	  

	  

Committee	  on	  Educational	  Interventions	  for	  Children	  with	  Autism,	  National	  Research	  

	  

Council,	  Beach	  Center	  on	  Families	  and	  Disability,	  University	  of	  Kansas,	  Lawrence,	  KS.	  	  

	  

	  

Tustin,	  R.	  D.	  (1995).	  The	  effects	  of	  advance	  notice	  of	  activity	  transitions	  on	  stereotypic	  

	  

behavior.	  Journal	  of	  Applied	  Behavior	  Analysis,	  28,	  91–92.	  

	  

15	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 17 of 84

	  

P.V.	  ex	  rel.	  Valentin	  and	  Cruz,	  et	  al.,	  v.	  School	  District	  of	  Phila.,	  et	  al.	  (E.D.	  Pa.)	  –	  Consultation	  by	  Ami	  Klin	  PhD	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Siegel,	  B.,	  Szatmari,	  P.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Campbell,	  M.,	  Freeman,	  B.	  J.,	  Cicchetti,	  

	  

D.	  V.,	  Rutter,	  M.,	  Kline,	  W.,	  et	  al.	  (1994).	  Field	  trial	  for	  autistic	  disorder	  in	  DSM-­‐IV.	  

	  

American	  Journal	  of	  Psychology,	  151(9),	  1361-­‐1367.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Bailey,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Autism	  and	  pervasive	  	  

	  

	  

developmental	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  45(1),	  1-­‐36.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (eds).	  (2005).	  Handbook	  of	  autism	  and	  Pervasive	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  State,	  M.	  (2009).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  H.	  Kaplan	  &	  B.	  Sadock	  (Eds.),	  Comprehensive	  Textbook	  of	  Psychiatry,	  8th	  

	  

edition	  (pp.	  3540-­‐3559).	  Philadelphia,	  PA:	  Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  	  

	  

	  

Wilder,	  D.	  A.,	  Chen,	  L.,	  Atwell,	  J.,	  Pritchard,	  J.,	  &	  Weinstein,	  P.	  (2006).	  Brief	  functional	  analysis	  

	  

and	  treatment	  of	  tantrums	  associated	  with	  transitions	  in	  preschool	  children.	  Journal	  of	  

	  

Applied	  Behavior	  Analysis,	  39,	  103–107.	  

	  

	  

Wolery,	  M.,	  Anthony,	  L.,	  &	  Heckathorn,	  J.	  (1998).	  Transition-­‐based	  teaching:	  Effects	  on	  

	  

	  

transitions,	  teachers’	  behavior,	  and	  children’s	  learning.	  Journal	  of	  Early	  Intervention,	  21,	  

	  

117-­‐131.	  

	  

	  

Wolery,	  M.,	  &	  McWilliam,	  R.	  A.	  (1998).	  Classroom-­‐based	  practices	  for	  preschoolers	  with	  

	  

	  

disabilities.	  Intervention	  in	  School	  and	  Clinic,	  34(3)	  95-­‐102,	  117.	  

	  

	  

Wolery,	  M.,	  Anthony,	  L.,	  Caldwell,	  N.	  K.,	  Snyder,	  E.	  D.,	  &	  Morgante,	  J.	  D.	  (2002).	  	  Embedding	  	  

	  

	  

and	  distributing	  constant	  time	  delay	  in	  circle	  time	  and	  transitions.	  	  Topics	  in	  Early	  

	  

Childhood	  Special	  Education,	  22,	  14-­‐25.	  

	  

	  

16	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 18 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

EMORY	  UNIVERSITY	  SCHOOL	  OF	  MEDICINE	  

CURRICULUM	  VITAE	  

	  

Revised:	  05/31/2012	  

1.	  	   Name:	  Ami	  Klin	  

	  

2.	  	   Office	  Address:	  	  

	  

	  

Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  

	  

	  

1920	  Briarcliff	  Road	  NE	  

	  

	  

Atlanta,	  GA	  30329-­‐4010	  

	  

	  

Tel.:	  404	  785	  5762	  

	  

	  

Fax:	  404	  785	  9485	  

	  

	  

	  

3.	  	   E-­‐mail	  Address:	  ami.klin@emory.edu	  	  

	  

4.	  	   Citizenship:	  US	  

	  

5.	   Current	  Titles	  and	  Affiliations:	  

	  

	  

a.	  	   Academic	  appointments:	  

	  

	  

	  

I.	  	   Primary	  appointment:	  

	  

	  

	  

Georgia	  Research	  Alliance	  Eminent	  Scholar	  Professor	  and	  Chief,	  Division	  of	  Autism	  &	  

	  

	  

	  

Related	  Disorders,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Emory	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  

	  

	  

	  

Atlanta	  GA	  [2011	  –	  present]	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

II.	   Joint	  and	  secondary	  appointments:	  

	  

	  

	  

Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Emory	  University	  	  [2011	  –	  present]	  

	  

	  

	  

Center	  for	  Translational	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Emory	  University	  	  [2011	  –	  present]	  

	  

	  

b.	   Clinical/Administrative	  appointments:	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Director,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center,	  Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta,	  Atlanta	  GA	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

[2011	  –	  present]	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Chief	  of	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Disorders,	  Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta,	  Atlanta	  GA	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

[2011	  –	  present]	  

	  

6.	   Previous	  Academic	  and	  Professional	  Appointments:	  

	  

	  

[1992	  –	  1993]	   Instructor	  in	  Developmental	  Psychopathology,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

	  

[1993	  –	  1999]	   Assistant	  Professor	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 19 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

[1999	  –	  2009]	   Harris	  Associate	  Professor	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

	  

[2002	  –	  2010]	   Secondary	  Appointment	  at	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Yale	  University,	  New	  Haven	  CT	  

	  

[2006	  –	  2010]	   Faculty	  Member,	  Cognitive	  Science	  Program,	  Yale	  University,	  New	  Haven	  CT	  	  

[2009	  –	  2010]	  Harris	  Professor	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Excellence,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

	  

	  

7.	   Previous	  Administrative	  and/or	  Clinical	  Appointments:	  

	  

	  

[2002	  –	  2004]	   Chief	  of	  Psychology,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  	  

	  

[2006	  –	  2010]	  	 D  irector,	  Autism	  Program,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

New	  Haven	  CT	  

[2008	  –	  2010]	   Director	  and	  Principal	  Investigator,	  NIH	  Autism	  Center	  of	  Excellence,	  Autism	  Program,	  

	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven	  CT	  

	  

8.	   Licensures/Boards	  

	  

	  

	  

American	  Psychological	  Association	  and	  State	  of	  Connecticut	  Department	  of	  Public	  Health,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Clinical	  Psychology:	  License	  #	  001812	  [1992]	  

	  

	  

American	  Psychological	  Association	  and	  State	  of	  Georgia	  Department	  of	  Public	  Health,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Clinical	  Psychology:	  License	  #	  PSY003545	  [2012]	  

	  

	  

9.	  	   Specialty	  Boards:	  N/A	  

	  

10.	  	   Education:	  

	  

	  

[1983]	  B.A.,	  Psychology,	  Political	  Science	  &	  History,	  Hebrew	  University	  of	  Jerusalem,	  Israel	  

	  

[1988]	   PhD,	  Psychology	  (Cognitive	  Science	  &	  Developmental	  Psychopathology),	  

	  

	  

	  

University	  of	  London	  (LSE	  &	  MRC	  Cognitive	  Development	  Unit),	  London,	  UK.	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Supervisors:	  Professors	  Rob	  Farr,	  Uta	  Frith,	  &	  John	  Morton	  

	  

11.	   Postgraduate	  Training:	  

	  

	  

[1989	  –	  1991]	   Post-­‐doctoral	  Fellow	  in	  Developmental	  Psychopathology,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

	  

[1991	  –	  1992]	   Post-­‐doctoral	  Fellow	  in	  Clinical	  Child	  Psychology,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  New	  Haven,	  CT	  

	  

12.	   Military	  or	  Government	  Service:	  N/A	  

	  

13.	  	   Committee	  Memberships	  and	  Public	  Service:	  

	  

	  

	  

a.	   National	  and	  International:	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 20 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Autism	  Science	  Foundation,	  Scientific	  Advisory	  Board,	  2009	  –	  present.	  

Autism	  Science	  Foundation,	  Mentorship	  Grant	  Program,	  2009	  	  

	  

	  

NICHD	  Council	  ZHD1	  DSR-­‐H	  WA,	  P01	  (Program	  Project)	  Study	  Section,	  2009.	  	  

NIH	  Special	  Emphasis	  Panel	  ZRG1	  BBBP-­‐L,	  ARRA	  Challenge	  Grants,	  2009.	  

NSF,	  ad	  hoc	  review,	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  2009.	  

NIH:ZMH1	  ERB-­‐I(C3),	  NIMH	  Loan	  Repayment	  Program,	  Developmental	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychopathology	  and	  Developmental	  Cognitive	  Neuroscience,	  2009.	  

	  

	  

Autism	  Spectrum	  News,	  Editorial	  Board,	  2008	  –	  present.	  	  

Autism	  Speaks,	  Treatment	  Grant	  Review:	  2008	  Grant	  Reviews,	  2008.	  

	  

	  

Connecticut	  Academy	  of	  Arts	  &	  Sciences,	  Honorary	  Member,	  2008	  –	  present	  	  

	  

	  

Medical	  Research	  Council	  (UK)	  Developmental	  Cognitive	  Neuroscience	  Grant	  Reviews,	  2007.	  

NIH:	  ZRG1	  BBBP-­‐L	  (CPDD),	  Exploratory	  Applications	  in	  Child	  Psychopathology,	  2007.	  

Autism	  Speaks,	  Basic	  and	  Clinical	  Research:	  2007	  Grant	  Reviews,	  2007.	  

	  

	  

State	  of	  Connecticut	  Department	  of	  Mental	  Retardation,	  Steering	  Committee	  –	  Services	  for	  

	  

	  

	  

Individuals	  with	  Autism	  without	  Intellectual	  Disabilities,	  2006	  –	  2007.	  	  

	  

	  

NIH:	  ZRG1	  BBBP-­‐L	  (CPDD),	  Exploratory	  Applications	  in	  Child	  Psychopathology,	  2006.	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	  and	  Autism	  Speaks	  Grant	  Reviews,	  2006.	  	  

NIH:	  BBBP-­‐4	  (CP):	  Cognition	  and	  Perception	  Study	  Section,	  2005.	  	  

NIH:	  BBBP-­‐6	  (CPDD):	  Behavioral	  Science	  Track	  award	  for	  Rapid	  Transition	  (B/START),	  2005	  

Autism	  Speaks,	  Ad	  Council	  Advisory	  Board,	  2005	  –	  present.	  	  

	  

	  

Chapel	  Haven,	  Transition	  into	  Independent	  Adulthood	  Program,	  Board	  Member,	  2005	  –	  	  

	  

present.	  

	  

	  

NIH:	  BBBP-­‐6	  (CPDD):	  Child	  Psychopathology	  and	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Study	  Section,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

2004.	  	  

New	  Roads	  High	  School,	  Santa	  Monica,	  California,	  Advisory	  Board,	  2004-­‐present.	  	  

MAAP	  Services	  for	  Autism	  and	  Asperger	  Syndrome,	  Advisory	  Board,	  2004-­‐present.	   	  

Berkshire	  Centers	  for	  Independent	  Living,	  Advisory	  Board,	  2004-­‐present.	   	  

National	  Autistic	  Society	  (UK):	  ad	  hoc	  reviewer	  of	  grant	  applications,	  2003.	  

NIH:	  BBBP-­‐6	  (CPDD):	  Behavioral	  Science	  Track	  award	  for	  Rapid	  Transition	  (B/START),	  2003.	  

PPP	  Foundation	  (UK):	  ad	  hoc	  reviewer	  of	  grant	  applications	  for	  Themed	  Grants:	  Children	  &	  	  

	  

Adolescents	  Programme,	  2002.	  

National	  Institute	  on	  Drug	  Abuse,	  I/START	  (Imaging-­‐Science	  Track	  Award	  for	  Research	  

Transition):	  ad	  hoc	  reviewer,	  2002.	  

NIH:	  STAART	  (Studies	  to	  Advance	  Autism	  Research	  and	  Treatment)	  Centers	  (BBBP-­‐6):	  Program	  

Projects	  Study	  Section,	  2001.	  

Nuffield	  Foundation,	  London,	  England:	  ad	  hoc	  reviewer	  of	  grant	  applications	  on	  autism,	  	  

	  

2001.	  

NIH:	  Special	  Emphasis	  Panel	  on	  Autism,	  2001.	  

Cure	  Autism	  Now:	  ad	  hoc	  reviewer	  of	  grant	  applications,	  2000.	  

Autism	  Society	  of	  America	  Foundation:	  Applied	  Autism	  Research	  Grants	  Review	  Panel,	  2000	  

American	  Psychiatric	  Association,	  DSM-­‐IV	  Test	  Revision	  Child	  Work	  Group,	  responsibility	  for	  

Mental	  Retardation,	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  and	  Language	  

Disorders,	  1998	  –	  2000.	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 21 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

ASPEN	  (Asperger	  Syndrome	  Education	  Network,	  Inc.),	  Advisory	  Board,	  1997	  –	  present.	  

Calvin	  Hill	  Day	  Care	  Center,	  Board	  of	  Directors,	  1997-­‐2010	  

ASC-­‐U.S.,	  Inc.	  (Asperger	  Syndrome	  Coalition	  of	  the	  United),	  Advisory	  Board,	  1997	  –	  2002.	  

NIH:	  Special	  Emphasis	  Panel	  on	  Autism,	  1997.	  

Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America,	  Chair,	  Task	  Force	  on	  Nonverbal	  Learning	  

	  

Disabilities	  and	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome,	  1995	  –	  1997.	  	  

American	  Psychiatric	  Association,	  DSM-­‐IV	  Field	  Trials	  and	  Text	  Preparation,	  responsibility	  for	  

Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders	  and	  Mental	  Retardation	  (assisted	  Dr.	  Fred	  R.	  

Volkmar),	  1993	  –	  1994.	  	  

	  

b.	   Regional	  and	  State:	  

	  

Kennedy	  Center	  Autism	  Program,	  Honorary	  Committee,	  2nd	  Annual	  “Magic	  Moments”,	  

	  

	  

	  

Trumbull,	  CT,	  September	  2nd,	  2008.	  

	  

	  

New	  Jersey	  Governor’s	  Council	  for	  Autism,	  Council	  Member,	  2005.	  	  

	  

	  

c.	   Institutional:	  

	  

	  

	  

Membership	  of	  the	  Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine	  Senior	  Appointments	  and	  Promotions	  Committee,	  

2009	  –	  2010.	  

	  

Chair,	  Assistant	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee	  (Behavioral	  Social	  Neuroscience),	  Yale	  Child	  

Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2009.	  

Chair,	  Assistant	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee	  (Clinical	  Psychology),	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2008.	  

Assistant	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee	  (Child	  Psychiatry),	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  	  

	  

University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2008.	  

Associate	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee	  (Developmental	  Neuroimaging),	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  	  

Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2008.	  

Business	  Manager	  Search	  Committee,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  	  

	  

Medicine,	  2007.	  

Professorship	  Search	  Committee	  (Communication	  Disorders),	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  	  

	  

University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2007.	  	  

Directorship	  of	  the	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Liaison	  Committee,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  

Medicine,	  2005	  –	  2006.	  

Assistant	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee,	  (Developmental	  Disabilities	  and	  Infancy),	  Yale	  Child	  

Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2003.	  

Assistant	  Professorship	  Search	  Committee,	  (Child	  Development	  and	  Social	  Policy),	  Yale	  Child	  

Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2003.	  	  

	  

14.	  	   Consultantships:	  N/A	  

	  

15.	   Editorships	  and	  Editorial	  Boards:	  

	  

	  

Molecular	  Autism,	  Editorial	  Board,	  2009	  -­‐	  present.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 22 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Mercadante,	  M.T.	  (Eds.).	  (2006).	  Special	  supplement	  on	  autism.	  	B   razilian	  Journal	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry	  (Revista	  Brasileira	  de	  Psiquiatria),	  28.	  	  (Supl	  I).	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.	  (Eds.).	  (2006).	  The	  cognitive	  neuroscience	  of	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  	  

Brain	  &	  Cognition,	  61.	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (Eds.)	  (2005).	  Special	  issue	  on	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  	  

and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  35(2).	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.R.	  (Eds.)	  (2003).	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  Special	  issue	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  

Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  12.	  

	  

Infanto,	  The	  Journal	  of	  the	  Brazilian	  Association	  of	  Child	  Neurology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  Editorial	  Board,	  

	  

	  

2000	  –	  2004.	  

	  

	  

16.	  	   Manuscript	  Reviewer	  (1995	  –	  present):	  

	  

Nature	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Social	  Cognitive	  &	  Affective	  Neuroscience	  

Science	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Child	  Development	  

New	  England	  Journal	  of	  Medicine	   	  

	  

Brain	  &	  Cognition	  

Journal	  of	  Neuroscience	   	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Autism	  &	  Developmental	  Disorders	  

Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry	   	  

	  

Neuropsychology	  

American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry	   	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Clinical	  &	  Experimental	  Neuropsychology	  

Trends	  In	  Cognitive	  Sciences	   	  

	  

	  

American	  Journal	  of	  Mental	  Retardation	  

Biological	  Psychiatry	   	  

	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry	  

Philosophical	  Transactions	  of	  the	  Royal	  Society,	   Development	  &	  Psychopathology	  

	  

Biological	  Sciences	   	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Child	  Neurology	  

Journal	  of	  Physiology	   	  

	  

	  

	  

Child	  Neuropsychology	  

Developmental	  Science	   	  

	  

	  

Bulletin	  of	  the	  Menninger	  Clinic	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Psychology	   	  

	  

	  

Emotion	  

Psychological	  Bulleting	   	  

	  

	  

Autism	  

Journal	  of	  Speech	  Language	  &	  Hearing	  Research	   European	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  

Consciousness	  &	  Cognition	   	  

	  

	  

Autism	  Research	  

Psychiatry	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

	  

Israel	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry	  

British	  Journal	  of	  Psychology	   	  

	  

	  

Child	  Abuse	  &	  Neglect	  

	  

17.	   Honors	  and	  Awards:	  

	  

	  

	  

‘Emily	  Cavaliere	  Puzio	  and	  Frank	  Mauro	  Puzio	  Award	  for	  Commitment	  and	  Dedication	  to	  Improving	  the	  

Quality	  of	  Life	  of	  Individuals	  with	  Autism’,	  Eden	  Autism	  Services	  and	  Princeton	  University,	  	  

Princeton,	  NJ,	  June	  3,	  2011.	  	  

‘Annual	  Award	  for	  Clinical	  Science,	  Service	  and	  Advocacy	  on	  Behalf	  of	  Individuals	  with	  Autism’,	  	  

	  

	  

Fordham	  University,	  Los	  niños	  Services,	  New	  York	  City,	  NY.	  Eighth	  Annual	  Young	  Child	  Expo	  &	  

Conference,	  April	  7	  2011,	  New	  York	  City,	  NY.	  	  

The	  Foote	  School	  –	  Plaque	  at	  Frank	  M.	  Perrine	  Library	  honoring	  ‘Dr.	  Klin’s	  expertise,	  passion,	  and	  

wisdom	  in	  his	  work	  with	  children	  with	  developmental	  disabilities’,	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  	  

October	  24,	  2010.	  

US	  Department	  of	  Health	  &	  Human	  Services,	  Interagency	  Autism	  Coordinating	  Committee	  mention	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 23 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

of	  2009	  paper	  as	  one	  of	  the	  three	  most	  promising	  papers	  of	  the	  year	  in	  autism	  [Klin,	  A.,	  Lin,	  D.J.,	  

	  

Gorrindo,	  P.,	  Ramsay,	  G.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2009).	  Two-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism	  fail	  to	  orient	  towards	  

	  

human	  biological	  motion	  but	  attend	  instead	  to	  non-­‐social,	  physical	  contingencies.	  Nature,	  459,	  

	  

257-­‐261.	  [NIHMS	  #	  103019];	  2009.	  	  

	  

US	  Department	  of	  Health	  &	  Human	  Services,	  Interagency	  Autism	  Coordinating	  Committee	  mention	  of	  

	  

	  

2008	  paper	  as	  one	  of	  the	  top	  autism-­‐related	  papers	  of	  the	  year	  2008	  [Jones,	  W.,	  Carr,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.	  

	  

	  

Absence	  of	  preferential	  looking	  to	  the	  eyes	  of	  approaching	  adults	  predicts	  level	  of	  social	  	  

	  

	  

disability	  in	  2-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry.	  2008,	  65(8):946-­‐54.];	  2009.	  

	  

Nature,	  ‘Making	  the	  Paper:	  Ami	  Klin’.	  Nature.	  2009,	  459,	  138	  (Highlighted	  researcher	  of	  Nature	  issue	  

	  

	  

#	  459);	  2009.	  	  

	  

Researcher	  of	  the	  Year,	  “Healthcare	  Heroes”,	  Business	  New	  Haven	  in	  collaboration	  with	  Yale	  -­‐	  New	  	  

	  

	  

Haven	  Hospital	  &	  ConnectiCare;	  2008.	  	  

	  

Pearl	  H.	  Rieger	  Award	  for	  Excellence	  in	  Clinical	  Science,	  Rush	  NeuroBehavioral	  Center,	  Rush	  Medical	  

	  

	  

Center,	  Chicago,	  IL;	  2007.	  	  

	  

‘You	  Make	  the	  Difference	  Award’	  by	  the	  Connecticut	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Resource	  Center,	  New	  Haven,	  	  

	  

	  

CT;	  2006.	  	  

	  

“Portraits	  of	  Inspiration	  Award”,	  The	  Asperger’s	  Association	  of	  New	  England;	  2006.	  	  

	  

Distinguished	  Award	  for	  Clinical	  Services	  and	  Research,	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  Education	  Network	  	  

	  

	  

of	  America;	  2001.	  	  

	  

Distinguished	  Award	  for	  Research,	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America	  Foundation;	  2001.	  	  

	  

Nominated	  Fellow	  to	  the	  National	  Center	  for	  Clinical	  Infant	  Programs	  [Zero	  to	  Three];	  1992	  –	  1994.	  	  

	  

Robert	  McKenzie	  Prize	  for	  Outstanding	  Ph.D.	  Thesis,	  University	  of	  London;	  1988.	  	  

	  

Ph.D.	  Distinction,	  University	  of	  London;	  1988.	  	  

	  

Economic	  and	  Social	  Research	  Council	  Award,	  University	  of	  London;	  1984	  –	  1986.	  	  

	  

Argov	  Scholarship	  Award,	  University	  of	  London;	  1983	  –	  1984.	  	  

	  

Dean’s	  List	  of	  Academic	  Achievement,	  Hebrew	  University	  of	  Jerusalem;	  1980	  –	  1983.	  	  

	  

18.	   Society	  Memberships:	  

	  

	  

International	  Society	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  2001	  –	  present.	  

	  

Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development,	  1995	  –	  present.	  

	  

New	  York	  Academy	  of	  Sciences,	  2010	  –	  present.	  	  

	  

	  

19.	  	   Organization	  of	  National	  or	  International	  Conferences:	  

	  

	  

a.	   Administrative	  Positions:	  	  

	  

	  

	  

IMFAR	  2012	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Toronto,	  Canada),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

and	  Organizing	  Committees.	  

	  

IMFAR	  2011	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  San	  Diego,	  CA),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

and	  Organizing	  Committees.	  	  

	  

Autism	  –	  Europe,	  Honorary	  Scientific	  Committee,	  IX	  International	  Congress,	  Catania,	  Italy,	  	  

	  

	  

October	  8-­‐10,	  2010.	  

	  

IMFAR	  2010	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Philadelphia,	  PA),	  Scientific	  Program	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 24 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  7	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Committee.	  	  

	  

IMFAR	  2009	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Chicago,	  IL),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

Committee.	  	  

	  

IMFAR	  2008	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  London,	  UK),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

Committee.	  	  

	  

Autism	  –	  Europe,	  Honorary	  Scientific	  Committee,	  VIII	  International	  Congress,	  Oslo,	  Norway,	  	  

	  

	  

October	  15-­‐17,	  2007.	  

	  

International	  Congress	  on	  Autism,	  President	  of	  Organizing	  Committee,	  Fortaleza,	  Brazil,	  

	  

	  

June	  5-­‐7,	  2006.	  

	  

IMFAR	  2006	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Montreal,	  Canada),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

Committee.	  

	  

IMFAR	  2005	  (International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Boston,	  MA),	  Scientific	  Program	  

	  

	  

Committee.	  

	  

International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  Abstract	  Selection	  Committee,	  2005	  –	  2009.	  	  

	  

Autism	  Europe:	  Honorary	  Committee,	  Seventh	  International	  Autism	  Europe	  Congress	  in	  Lisbon,	  

	  

	  

Portugal,	  2003.	  

	  

	  

b.	  	   Sessions	  as	  Chair:	  	  

	  

	  

Chair,	  State-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art	  Lecture	  delivered	  by	  Professor	  Sir	  Michael	  Rutter:	  “Research	  into	  autism:	  	  

	  

	  

accomplishments,	  puzzles	  and	  challenges”,	  The	  8th	  International	  Congress	  Autism	  –	  Europe,	  	  

	  

	  

Oslo,	  Norway;	  2007.	  	  

	  

Chair,	  Symposium	  on	  Visual	  Attention	  and	  Perception	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders,	  The	  8th	  	  

	  

	  

International	  Congress	  Autism	  –	  Europe,	  Oslo,	  Norway;	  2007.	  	  

	  

Chair,	  Symposium	  on	  Emotions	  and	  Social	  Interactions,	  6th	  Annual	  Meeting,	  International	  Meeting	  	  

	  

	  

for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR),	  Seattle,	  Washington;	  2007.	  	  

	  

Chair,	  Symposium	  on	  Social-­‐Emotional	  and	  Language	  Abilities	  in	  Nonretarded	  Children	  with	  Autism:	  	  

	  

	  

Etiologic	  and	  Interpersonal	  Implications	  Biennial	  Meeting	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  	  

	  

	  

Development,	  Albuquerque,	  New	  Mexico;	  1999.	  	  

	  

Chair,	  Symposium	  on	  Adaptive	  Behavior,	  Theory	  of	  Mind,	  and	  Emotional	  	   Understanding	  in	  Autism,	  	  

	  

	  

Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development,	  New	  Orleans,	  Louisiana;	  

	  

	  

1993.	  	  	  

	  

Chair,	  Symposium	  on	  Preschool	  Developmental	  Disabilities:	  Diagnosis	  and	  Outcome,	  Learning	  	  

	  

	  

Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America	  International	  Conference.	  Atlanta,	  Georgia;	  1992.	  

	  

	  

20.	  	   Research	  Focus:	  

	  

	  

My	  research	  focuses	  on	  cognitive	  science	  studies	  of	  evolutionary	  highly-­‐conserved,	  and	  

	  

developmentally	  early-­‐onset,	  mechanisms	  of	  socialization	  and	  their	  disruptions	  in	  infants,	  toddlers,	  

	  

children	  and	  adolescents	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  In	  the	  recent	  past,	  my	  lab	  has	  developed	  

	  

new	  technologies	  and	  methods	  for	  the	  detection	  of	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  year	  of	  life.	  

	  

21.	  	   Patents:	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 25 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  8	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

a.	   	  Issued:	  	   US	  Patent	  App	  #	  20060189886.	  System	  and	  method	  for	  quantifying	  and	  mapping	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

visual	  salience.	  	  Inventors:	  W.	  Jones	  and	  A.	  Klin.	  

	  

	  

b.	   Pending:	  	   None.	  

	  

22.	   Grant	  Support:	  	  

	  

	  

a.	  	   Active	  Support:	  

	  

	  

	  

I.	   Federally	  funded:	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

RC1	  MH088676	  ARRA	  	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Performance	  Indices	  of	  Social	  Disability	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   0%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  costs	  per	  year:	  	 $  	  317,328	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  995,164	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

10/01/2009	  –	  09/30/2011	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

RC1	  MH088676-­‐01S1	  Supplement	  ARRA	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Performance	  Indices	  of	  Social	  Disability	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism”:	  Increasing	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

the	  Scientific	  Yield	  of	  the	  National	  Database	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (NDAR)	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	2   %	  

	  

	  

Direct	  costs	  per	  year:	  	 $  	  73,404	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  121,484	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

06/01/2010	  –	  05/31/2011	  	  

	  	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

R01	  MH83712	  	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Perception	  of	  social	  and	  physical	  contingencies	  in	  infants	  with	  ASD”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   5%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  costs	  per	  year:	  	 $  	  250,000	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $2,068,750	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

04/01/2009	  –	  03/31/2014	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

R01	  MH083727	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“The	  Ontogeny	  of	  Social	  Visual	  Engagement	  in	  Infants	  at	  Risk	  for	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 26 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  9	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   0%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  costs	  per	  year:	  	 $  	  430,000	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $3,547,500	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2008	  –	  06/30/2013	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  and	  National	  Institute	  on	  Deafness	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

and	  Other	  Communication	  Disorders	  	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

P50	  MH081756-­‐01	  (Center	  Grant,	  NIH	  Autism	  Center	  of	  Excellence)	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mechanisms	  of	  Social	  Engagement	  in	  ASD”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD.	  and	  PI	  Project	  I,	  Director	  Administrative	  Core	  and	  Assessment	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Core	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	2   9%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs:	  $1,572,567,	  $1,573,199,	  $1,547,848,	  $1,575,685,	  $1,573,266	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $12,416,533	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

04/01/2008	  –	  03/31/2013	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

P01	  HD003008-­‐39	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Autism	  and	  Related	  Disorders:	  Development	  and	  Outcome”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Fred	  Volkmar,	  MD	  

	  

	  

Role:	   	  

Co-­‐PI	  of	  Grant,	  PI	  of	  Assessment	  Core,	  Investigator,	  Projects	  1	  &	  2	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   8%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs:	  	   $704,800,	  $683,201,	  $702,979,	  $723,349,	  $744,331	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $5,768,879	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

09/03/2006	  –	  08/31/2011	  

	  

	  

	  

II.	   Private	  Foundation	  funded:	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Program	  Project	  Award	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Brain-­‐Behavior	  Growth	  Charts	  of	  Altered	  Social	  Engagement	  in	  ASD	  Infants”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  (Project	  PIs:	  Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  &	  Warren	  Jones,	  PhD,	  Kevin	  Pelphrey,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

PhD,	  and	  James	  Mcpartland,	  PhD)	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   5%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs	  per	  year:	  $	  1,200,000	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  4,500,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

08/01/2010	  –	  07/31/2013	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Simons	  Simplex	  Consortium	  Genetics	  Project	  –	  Yale	  Site”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  M.D.	  (Co-­‐PI	  Matthew	  W.	  State,	  M.D.,	  Ph.D.)	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   %	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs	  per	  year:	  $391,671,	  $375,000,	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 27 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $879,111	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

10/15/2006	  –	  03/31/2010	  (renewable	  for	  additional	  third	  year)	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Award	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Simons	  Physical	  and	  Clinical	  Infrastructure	  for	  Research	  on	  Infants-­‐at-­‐Risk”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	  5%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs	  per	  year:	  $	  1,200,000	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  720,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

08/01/2010	  –	  07/31/2013	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

III.	  	   Contracts:	  None.	  

	  

B)	   Previous	  support:	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Program	  Project	  Award	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Identification	  of	  Vulnerabilities	  for	  Autism	  in	  Infancy”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   5%	  

	  

	  

Direct	  Costs	  per	  year:	  $1,444,118,	  $1,239,940	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  3,220,870	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2008	  –	  06/30/2010	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

U54	  MH66494	  (Center	  Grant,	  NIH	  Studies	  to	  Advance	  Autism	  Research	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

and	  Treatment)	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“The	  Social	  Neuroscience	  of	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Disorders”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Fred	  R.	  Volkmar,	  MD	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  Project:	  Co-­‐PI	  Yale	  STAART,	  PI	  Project	  I,	  Investigator	  Projects	  II	  &	  V,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Co-­‐Director	  Administrative	  Core,	  Director	  Assessment	  Core,	  PI	  for	  Yale	  STAART	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

competitive	  extension	  (07/01/2007	  –	  12/3102008)	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   0%	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $8,587,720	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

09/27/2002	  –	  06/30/2008	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Project	  Award	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Establishment	  of	  a	  Model	  Diagnostic	  Laboratory	  for	  Infants	  at	  Risk	  for	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	1   5%	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 28 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  2,576,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2004	  –	  06/30/2008	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Science	  Foundation	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

NSF	  0532610	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Quantitative	  measures	  of	  a	  social	  response	  for	  autism	  diagnosis”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Brian	  Scassellati,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Role	  in	  Project:	  Co-­‐PI	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   %	  Concurrent	  	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $641,214	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

11/15/2005	  –	  10/31/2008	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Mental	  Health	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

R01	  MH07084	  	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“The	  Fusiform	  and	  Amygdala	  in	  the	  Pathobiology	  of	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Robert	  T.	  Schultz,	  PhD	  (PI	  Left	  Yale)	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  Project:	  Investigator	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $1,990,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

02/25/2005	  –	  01/31/2010	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  

	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

R01	  HD42127	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Eye-­‐tracking	  Studies	  of	  Social	  Visual	  Pursuit	  in	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   0%	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $1,998,285	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

09/27/2002	  –	  08/31/2007	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Listening	  Preferences	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism:	  The	  Playtest	  as	  an	  Early	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Screening	  Device”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  Ph.D.	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	2   0%	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $120,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2004	  –	  12/312006	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

Maternal	  &	  Child	  Health	  Bureau	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

R01	  	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Early	  detection	  of	  autism:	  Comparison	  of	  Three	  Screening	  Instruments”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Deborah	  A.	  Fein,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Role:	   	  

Investigator	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	4   %	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 29 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $282,012	  (Yale	  sub-­‐award	  only)	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

09/01/01	  –	  07/31/05	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

Korczak	  Foundation,	  the	  Netherlands	  

	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Project	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Nosology,	  Neuropsychology	  and	  Social	  Cognition	  of	  Autism	  and	  Related	  

	  

	  

	  Conditions”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	6   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  200,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

03/01/2002	  –	  02/25/2006	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

P01	  HD003008	  (Program	  Project)	   	  

	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mental	  Retardation	  and	  Developmental	  Psychopathology”	  

	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Fred	  Volkmar,	  MD	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  project:	  	  PI	  Project	  III,	  Investigator	  Project	  IV	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	3   0%	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $4,034,169	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

04/01/2000	  –	  03/31/2005	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mentor-­‐based	  Post-­‐Doctoral	  Fellowship	  in	  Social	  Neuroscience”	  (Melissa	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Preissler,	  PhD)	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $80,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2003	  –	  06/30/2005	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

Doris	  Duke	  Charitable	  Foundation	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“A	  Humanoid	  Robot	  as	  an	  Interactive	  Diagnostic	  Device	  in	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Brian	  Scassellati,	  Ph.D.	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  the	  Project:	  Co-­‐PI	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $90,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2004	  –	  06/30/2005	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mentor-­‐based	  Post-­‐Doctoral	  Fellowship	  in	  Social	  Neuroscience”	  (Celine	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Saulnier,	  PhD)	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 30 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $80,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2002	  –	  06/30/2004	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Studies	  Of	  Social	  Visual	  Pursuit	  in	  Non-­‐Human	  Primates	  with	  Mesiofrontal-­‐	  

	  

	  

Limbic	  Lesions	  Previously	  Shown	  to	  Offer	  a	  Successful	  Animal	  Model	  of	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

	  P.I.:	   	  

Co-­‐PI	  Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  (Co-­‐PI	  Jocelyne	  Bachevalier,	  PhD)	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $91,730	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2001	  –	  06/30/2003	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Precursors	  of	  Joint	  Attention	  Skills	  in	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Conditions”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Kasia	  Chawarska,	  Ph.D.	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  Project:	  Investigator	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  120,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2000	  –	  06/30/2002	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Visual	  Scanning	  Patterns	  and	  Mental	  Representations	  of	  Social	  Interaction	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

in	  Infants	  and	  Toddlers	  Suspected	  of	  having	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $97,080	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/2000	  –	  06/30/2002	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mentor-­‐based	  Post-­‐Doctoral	  Fellowship	  in	  Social	  Neuroscience”	  (The	  Roland	  D.	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Ciaranello,	  MD	  Memorial	  Fellowship	  in	  Basic	  Research)	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $80,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/1999	  –	  06/30/2001	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

Korczak	  Foundation,	  the	  Netherlands	  	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Neuroscientific	  Research	  in	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Donald	  J.	  Cohen,	  MD	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 31 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  Project:	  PI	  Project	  I	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	6   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $	  150,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

04/15/1998	  –	  03/30/2002	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

P01	  HD035482	  (Program	  Project,	  Collaborative	  Projects	  of	  Excellent	  in	  Autism)	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Neurobiology	  and	  Genetics	  of	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Conditions”	   	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Fred	  R.	  Volkmar,	  MD	  (Yale	  CPEA)	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  project:	  	  Co-­‐PI	  Project	  IV,	  Co-­‐Director	  Assessment	  Core	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	2   3%	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $5,754,109	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

06/01/1997	  –	  05/31/2002	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

Autism	  Society	  of	  America	  Foundation	   	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

Private	  Foundation	  Grant	   	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Attributing	  Meaning	  to	  Social	  Movement	  in	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	5   %	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  	  $30,093	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

07/01/1998	  –	  06/30/1999	  

	  

	  

	  

Agency:	  

National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  

	  

	  

I.D.#	   	  

P01	  HD003008	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Title:	   	  

“Mental	  Retardation	  and	  Developmental	  Psychopathology”	  

	  

	  

	  

P.I.:	   	  

Donald	  J.	  Cohen,	  MD	  

	  

	  

Role	  on	  project:	  	  Co-­‐PI,	  Project	  III	  	  

	  

	  

Percent	  effort:	2   5%	  

	  

	  

Total	  costs	  for	  project	  period:	  $	  4,345,000	  

	  

	  

Project	  period:	  

09/15/1992	  –	  09/14/1999	  

	  

23.	   Clinical	  Service	  Contributions:	  

	  

As	  a	  clinician	  and	  scientist,	  the	  former	  was	  always	  the	  inspiration	  for	  the	  latter.	  My	  conviction	  is	  that	  

our	  very	  best	  research	  hypotheses	  are	  derived	  from	  our	  play	  rooms,	  and	  indeed,	  my	  work	  in	  cognitive	  

science	  has	  been	  an	  attempt	  to	  objectify	  and	  quantify	  –	  via	  new	  technologies	  and	  methods	  –	  the	  

intuitive	  judgments	  that	  we	  make	  as	  clinicians.	  Since	  autism	  is	  a	  social	  disability,	  as	  clinicians,	  we	  are	  

walking	  laboratories	  of	  social	  engagement.	  As	  scientists,	  we	  bring	  this	  experience	  to	  bear	  on	  the	  design	  

of	  our	  experiments,	  on	  our	  scientific	  constructs,	  and	  in	  our	  writing.	  I	  have	  received	  several	  awards	  for	  

my	  work	  as	  a	  clinician	  and	  advocate	  (see	  #	  17,	  above).	  But	  I	  believe	  that	  one	  of	  my	  proudest	  

accomplishments	  was	  to	  expand	  and	  refine	  one	  of	  the	  leading	  clinical	  services	  in	  the	  country	  for	  

individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  their	  families	  at	  the	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center.	  Building	  on	  the	  pioneering	  

work	  of	  Dr.	  Donald	  Cohen	  and	  collaborating	  with	  Dr.	  Fred	  Volkmar	  during	  the	  1990’s,	  I	  was	  able	  to	  

expand	  the	  clinical	  services	  provided	  by	  our	  clinics	  several	  fold,	  fully	  integrate	  it	  with	  our	  program	  of	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 32 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	5  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

clinical	  science,	  establish	  outreach	  services,	  expand	  the	  faculty	  body	  7-­‐fold,	  create	  a	  pioneering	  toddler	  

clinic,	  and	  built	  the	  most	  comprehensive	  and	  intensive	  program	  focused	  on	  infants	  at	  risk	  for	  ASD	  in	  

the	  country,	  averaging	  3	  children	  per	  day.	  Functioning	  as	  the	  hub	  of	  the	  Autism	  Program	  at	  Yale,	  our	  

clinical	  services	  grounded	  our	  program	  of	  research,	  allowed	  us	  to	  train	  the	  next	  generation	  of	  clinical	  

leaders	  in	  the	  field	  in	  several	  pertinent	  disciplines	  (child	  psychiatry,	  developmental	  pediatrics,	  clinical	  

psychology,	  speech-­‐language	  pathology,	  and	  clinical	  social	  work),	  and	  placed	  us	  at	  the	  center	  of	  

information	  dissemination	  and	  advocacy	  efforts	  in	  our	  community,	  locally,	  nationally,	  and	  

internationally.	  The	  move	  to	  Atlanta	  in	  2011	  brought	  these	  models	  to	  what	  is	  the	  largest	  center	  of	  

clinical	  care	  of	  children	  and	  adolescents	  with	  autism	  in	  the	  country	  –	  the	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center,	  

leveraging	  the	  community	  outreach	  of	  the	  largest	  system	  of	  pediatric	  healthcare	  in	  the	  country	  –	  

Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta,	  within	  the	  context	  of	  an	  academic	  and	  scientific	  home	  –	  the	  especially	  

created	  Division	  of	  Autism	  &	  Related	  Disorders	  at	  the	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Emory	  University	  

School	  of	  Medicine,	  and	  through	  special	  collaborative	  relationships	  with	  cutting	  edge	  scientific	  

institutions	  such	  as	  the	  Emory	  Department	  of	  Human	  Genetics	  and	  Yerkes	  National	  Primate	  Research	  

Center.	  Our	  thriving	  research	  program	  now	  encompasses	  studies	  that	  range	  from	  genes	  to	  social	  mind	  

and	  brain,	  to	  model	  systems	  and	  creation	  of	  community-­‐viable	  systems	  of	  care.	  At	  the	  Marcus	  Autism	  

Center,	  our	  focus	  is	  on	  the	  Science	  of	  Clinical	  Care,	  and,	  particularly,	  bringing	  science	  to	  bear	  on	  

practice	  at	  a	  community	  level.	  The	  translational	  focus	  of	  our	  research	  is	  in	  line	  with	  current	  priorities	  at	  

the	  National	  Institutes	  of	  Health,	  and	  is	  reflected	  in	  our	  central	  membership	  of	  Emory	  Center	  for	  

Translational	  Social	  Neuroscience.	  	  

	  

24.	   Formal	  Teaching:	  

	  

	  

a.	   Medical	  Student	  Teaching:	  

	  

	  

Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  2nd	  Year	  Medical	  Students	  (YMS-­‐II),	  Clinical	  Psychiatry	  Module:	  	  

	  

	  

Module	  on	  autism	  and	  related	  disorders	  and	  on	  intellectual	  disabilities,	  2000	  –	  2010.	  	  	  

	  

	  

b.	   Graduate	  Programs:	  

	  

	  

Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center	  and	  Department	  of	  Psychiatry,	  Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  Psychiatry	  Residents	  II	  

	  

	  

(PGY-­‐II),	  Module	  on	  Autism	  and	  related	  disorders,	  2002-­‐2010.	  	  

	  

Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Child	  Psychiatry	  Residents	  I,	  Module	  on	  Autism	  and	  related	  disorders,	  	  

	  

	  

2004-­‐2010.	  

	  

Yale	  New	  Haven	  Hospital,	  Pediatric	  Dentistry	  Residents,	  Module	  on	  Autism	  and	  related	  disorders,	  	  

	  

	  

2005	  -­‐	  2006.	  

	  

	  

c.	   Other	  categories:	  

	  

	  

	  

Yale	  College:	  Psychology	  350a	  –	  Autism	  and	  related	  disorders:	  Seminar	  and	  Practicum,	  	  

	  

	  

2002-­‐2010.	  	  

	  

Course	  Director,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  NIMH,	  Yale	  STAART	  (Studies	  to	  Advance	  Autism	  Research	  	  

	  

	  

and	  Treatment)	  Summer	  Training	  in	  Autism	  (from	  2006:	  Yale	  Autism	  Program	  Summer	  	   	  

	  

	  

Institute),	  2001-­‐2010.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 33 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	6  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Regular	  (1	  per	  semester)	  guest	  lectures	  at	  the	  following	  programs	  and	  departments:	  Yale	  Department	  

	  

	  

of	  Statistics,	  Computer	  Science,	  Psychology,	  Bioethics	  Program,	  Cognitive	  Science;	  and	  Yale	  

	  

	  

School	  of	  Medicine	  Interdepartmental	  Neuroscience	  Program,	  Pediatrics,	  Developmental	  

	  

	  

Pediatrics,	  as	  well	  as	  occasional	  special	  events	  (e.g.,	  Alumni	  Week).	  	  

	  

25.	  	   Supervisory	  Teaching:	  	  

	  

	  

	  

a.	  Post-­‐doctoral	  (direct	  mentorship	  only):	  

	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Kevin	  Pelphrey,	  PhD	  [mentor,	  NIMH	  K-­‐award;	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2008	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Career	  Development	  Award:	  Functional	  Neuroimaging	  of	  Children	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

with	  Autism	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Marcel	  Just,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Harris	  Associate	  Professor,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Rojer	  Jou,	  MD	  [mentor,	  American	  Psychiatric	  Association	  Minority	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Research	  Training	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  and	  PhD,	  Investigative	  Medicine	  Program,	  Yale	  School	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Medicine	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Training	  Period:	  2007	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	  Diffusion	  Tensor	  Imaging	  studies	  of	  children	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

with	  autism	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Kevin	  Pelphrey,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Investigative	  Medicine	  Program,	  Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Susan	  Williams	  White,	  PhD	  [advisor,	  NIMH	  K	  Award]	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2007	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   A	  Cognitive-­‐Behavioral	  Intervention	  for	  Children	  with	  Autism	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Spectrum	  Disorders	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Lawrence	  Scahill,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Assistant	  Professor	  of	  Psychiatry,	  Virginia	  Commonwealth	  University	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Judith	  Danovitch,	  PhD	  [mentor	  and	  research	  advisor,	  post-­‐doctoral	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

fellow,	  NIMH	  T32;	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2006	  -­‐	  2008	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Understanding	  special	  interests	  in	  higher	  functioning	  individuals	  with	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

autism	  spectrum	  disorders	   	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Assistant	  Professor,	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Michigan	  State	  University	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Alexander	  Westphal,	  MD	  [mentor,	  NIMH	  Loan	  Repayment	  Program,	  and	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

PhD,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 34 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	7  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2006	  -­‐	  2008	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Novel	  applications	  of	  eye-­‐tracking	  to	  autism	  research:	  eye	  contrast	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

polarity,	  perceptual	  shifting,	  and	  novel	  outcome	  measures	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones,	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Investigative	  Medicine	  Program,	  Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

James	  McPartland,	  PhD	  [mentor	  and	  advisor,	  pre-­‐	  &	  post-­‐doctoral	  fellow,	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

NIMH	  R03,	  Yale	  CTSA	  Scholar	  Program,	  NIMH	  K-­‐award;	  Yale	  Child	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2004	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Neural	  correlates	  of	  perceptual	  expertise	  in	  autism;	  The	  role	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

context	  in	  face	  processing	  –	  ERP	  studies	  of	  adolescents	  with	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

autism;	  Electrophysiologic	  studies	  of	  infants	  at	  risk	  for	  autism.	  	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Linda	  Mayes,	  MD;	  Charles	  Nelson,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Assistant	  Professor,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Melissa	  Preissler,	  PhD	  [mentor,	  mentor-­‐based	  post-­‐doctoral	  fellowship,	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research)	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2003	  -­‐	  2005	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   The	  development	  of	  symbolic	  capacities	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Paul	  Bloom,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Dr.	  Melissa	  Allen,	  Assistant	  Professor,	  Psychology	  Department,	  Fylde	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Building,	  Lancaster	  University,	  UK	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Celine	  Saulnier,	  PhD	  [mentor,	  mentor-­‐based	  post-­‐doctoral	  fellowship,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research)	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2002	  -­‐	  2004	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Social	  ability	  and	  disability	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Clinical	  Director	  for	  Research,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center,	  Children’s	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Healthcare	  of	  Atlanta	  and	  Assistant	  Professor,	  Division	  of	  Autism	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Emory	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Katarzyna	  Chawarska,	  PhD	  [mentor,	  post-­‐doctoral	  fellowship]	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2000	  -­‐	  2002	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Programmatic	  research	  on	  infant	  cognition	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Director,	  Toddler	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Clinic,	  Associate	  Professor,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Katherine	  Tsatsanis,	  PhD	  [mentor,	  mentor-­‐based	  post-­‐doctoral	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

fellowship,	  Roland	  D.	  Ciaranello,	  MD	  Memorial	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Basic	  Research,	  National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research)	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 35 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	8  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

1999	  -­‐	  2001	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   The	  neuropsychology	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Associate	  Research	  Scientist,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

b.	  Pre-­‐doctoral	  (only	  direct	  mentorship;	  active	  supervision	  from	  year	  2000	  only):	  

	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jennifer	  Moriuchi	  [mentor,	  Marcus	  Graduate	  Fellowship	  in	  Autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disabilities]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  2015	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Project	  1:	  Aversion	  or	  Indifference:	  Mechanisms	  underlying	  atypical	  eye	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

contact	  in	  Autism	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Project	  2:	  Gender	  and	  Cognitive	  Profile	  as	  Predictors	  of	  Functional	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Outcomes	  in	  School-­‐aged	  Children	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Disorders	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Celine	  Saulnier	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Graduate	  Student,	  Clinical	  Psychology,	  Emory	  University	  Department	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychology	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jennifer	  Moriuchi	  [mentor-­‐based	  Predoctoral	  Fellowship	  award,	  Autism	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Science	  Foundation]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2012	  -­‐	  2013	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Gender	  and	  Cognitive	  Profile	  as	  Predictors	  of	  Functional	  Outcomes	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

School-­‐aged	  Children	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Graduate	  Student,	  Clinical	  Psychology,	  Emory	  University	  Department	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychology	   	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Tawny	  Tsang	  [mentor,	  predoctoral Donald J. Cohen Fellowship in

Developmental Social Neuroscience, Marcus Autism Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Development	  of	  Oculomotor	  Function	  from	  Birth	  Until	  3	  Years	  of	  Age	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Typically-­‐Developming	  Infants	  and	  Infants	  At-­‐Risk	  for	  Autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Serene	  Habayeb	  [mentor,	  predoctoral Donald J. Cohen Fellowship in

Developmental Neuroscience, Yale Child Study Center, Marcus

Autism Center]	  

	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Dynamic	  Measures	  of	  Social	  Visual	  Engagement	  in	  12-­‐	  to	  24-­‐Month-­‐Old	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Infants	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 36 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  1	  	  	9  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Maria	  Ly	  [mentor,	  Simons Fellowship in Design Engineering, Marcus

Autism Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Measures	  of	  Haptic	  Intersubjectivity	  in	  School-­‐Age	  Children	  with	  Autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Sarah	  Glazer	  [mentor,	  Simons Fellowship in Computational

Neuroscience, Marcus Autism Center	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Interactional	  Synchrony	  in	  Live	  Mother-­‐Infant	  Interactions	  in	  the	  First	  6	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Months	  of	  Life	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Kristin	  Muench	  [mentor,	  Research	  Specialist,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center]	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2011	  -­‐	  present	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Prenatal	  responses	  to	  speech	  in	  fetuses	  at	  risk	  for	  autism	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

Current	  Position:	   	  

Research	  Specialist,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jeremy	  Borjon	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Simons	  Fellowship	  in	  Computational	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2010	  -­‐	  2012	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Social	  Monitoring	  in	  Rhesus	  Monkeys	  with	  Lesions	  to	  Either	  the	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Amygdala,	  Hippocampus,	  or	  Orbitofrontal	  Cortex	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Andrea	  Trubanova	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Marcus	  Autism	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2010	  -­‐	  2012	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Inducing	  Change	  in	  Visual	  Scanning	  of	  Natural	  Scenes	  in	  Infants	  with	  ASD	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

by	  Manipulating	  Physical	  Contingencies	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jessica	  Jones	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Marcus	  Autism	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2010	  -­‐	  2012	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Dynamic	  Allocation	  of	  Visual	  Resources	  in	  the	  First	  6	  Months	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 37 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Research	  Fellow,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center	  and	  Emory	  Pediatrics	  	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Kate	  Rice	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2009	  -­‐	  2011	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Sensitivity	  and	  response	  to	  direct	  and	  averted	  gaze	  in	  toddlers	  with	  ASD.	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Graduate	  student	  in	  Developmental	  Psychology,	  University	  of	  Maryland	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jennifer	  Moriuchi	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2009	  -­‐	  2011	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Distinguishing	  gaze	  aversion	  from	  gaze	  indifference	  in	  two-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  	   autism.	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Graduate	  Student,	  Clinical	  Psychology,	  Emory	  University	  Department	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychology	   	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jennings	  Xu	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Simons	  Fellowship	  in	  Computational	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2008	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Social	  and	  visual	  factors	  impacting	  on	  social	  visual	  engagement	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

MD	  PhD	  Program	  at	  Case	  Western	  Reserve	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jessie	  Northrup	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2008	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Perception	  of	  Audiovisual	  Synchrony	  Under	  Varying	  Degrees	  of	  Social	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Context	  in	  Infants	  with	  Autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  Program	  in	  Clinical	  and	  Developmental	  Psychology,	  University	  of	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Pittsburgh	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Laura	  Edwards	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2008	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Visual	  scanning	  of	  dynamic	  faces	  in	  relation	  to	  varying	  positive	  and	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  negative	  affect	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  Program	  in	  Human	  Development	  and	  Education,	  Harvard	  University	  	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 38 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Marilyn	  Ackerman	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Simons	  Fellowship	  in	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  	   Engineering	  &	  Experimental	  Design,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2008	  –	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Sensitivity	  to	  social	  touch	  in	  school-­‐age	  children	  with	  autism	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Predoctoral	  Fellow,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Anna	  Krasno	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2007	  –	  2009	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Eye-­‐tracking	  measures	  of	  social	  monitoring	  in	  children	  with	  autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  Program	  in	  Clinical	  Psychology,	  University	  of	  California	  Santa	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Barbara	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Casey	  Zampella	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2007	  -­‐	  2009	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Oculomotor	  behavior	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  during	  naturalistic	  viewing	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

of	  social	  scenes	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  Program	  in	  Neuroscience,	  University	  of	  Rochester,	  NY	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Christine	  Foley	  [external	  advisor,	  PhD	  Clinical	  Psychology,	  Boston	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

University]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2007	  -­‐	  2010	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Do	  executive	  dysfunction,	  weak	  central	  coherence	  and	  theory	  of	  mind	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

predict	  social	  	   competence	  in	  non-­‐autistic	  school-­‐age	  children?	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Boston	  University	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

David	  Lin	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Simons	  Fellowship	  in	  Computational	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2006	  -­‐	  2008	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Preferential	  attention	  to	  human	  biological	  motion	  and	  non-­‐social	  physical	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

contingencies	  in	  2-­‐Year-­‐olds	  with	  autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

MD	  candidate,	  Division	  of	  Health	  Sciences	  and	  Technology,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Harvard	  Medical	  School	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Kelley	  Knoch	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2006	  -­‐	  2008	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 39 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  the	  “adaptive	  saccade”	  in	  adolescents	  with	  autism	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

spectrum	  disorders	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Clinical	  Neuropsychology,	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

University	  of	  Connecticut	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Sarah	  Shultz	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center;	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

PhD	  advisor,	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Yale	  University]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2006	  -­‐	  present	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Eye	  blinking	  as	  an	  index	  of	  stimulus	  salience	  in	  children	  with	  autism;	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

subsequently,	  Processing	  of	  biological	  motion	  in	  infants	  at	  risk	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

for	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD,	  Gordon	  Ramsay	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Yale	  University	  Department	  of	  Psychology	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Adam	  Naples,	  PhD	  [research	  advisor	  for	  PhD;	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Yale	  University]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2004	  -­‐	  2007	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Hyperlexia	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Elena	  Grigorenko,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Post-­‐doctoral	  Fellow	  (NIMH	  T32),	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center,	  Yale	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Katelin	  Carr	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2004	  -­‐	  2006	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  engagement	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

PhD	  candidate,	  Clinical	  Neuropsychology,	  Department	  of	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Psychology,	  University	  of	  Connecticut	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Phillip	  Gorrindo	  [mentor,	  predoctoral	  Simons	  Fellowship	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Computational	  Neuroscience,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center]	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2004	  -­‐	  2006	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Attention	  to	  human	  biological	  motion	  and	  non-­‐social	  physical	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

contingencies	  in	  point-­‐light	  Displays	  of	  human	  action	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Warren	  Jones	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

MD	  PhD	  candidate,	  Neuroscience	  Graduate	  Program	  at	  Vanderbilt	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Kennedy	  Center	  for	  Research	  on	  Human	  Development,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Vanderbilt	  University	  

	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Giacomo	  Vivanti	  	  [mentor	  and	  supervisor,	  research	  internship	  for	  	 	   

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

foreign	  scholars]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 40 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

2002	  -­‐	  2003	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  clinical	  and	  neuropsychological	  characteristics	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Fred	  Volkmar,	  MD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Post-­‐doctoral	  Associate,	  Cognitive	  Science,	  MIND	  Institute,	  UC	  Davis	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Warren	  Jones	  [senior	  thesis	  advisor,	  Yale	  College,	  and	  PhD	  advisor,	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Interdepartmental	  Neuroscience	  Program,	  Yale	  School	  of	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Medicine	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

1999	  -­‐	  2009	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Co-­‐creation	  of	  our	  programmatic	  research	  in	  social	  neuroscience	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  	   involving	  multiple	  projects	   	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Todd	  Constable,	  PhD,	  James	  Mazer,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Director	  of	  Research,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center,	  Children’s	  Healthcare	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Atlanta,	  Assistant	  Professor,	  Division	  of	  Autism	  and	  Related	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Disorders,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Emory	  University	  School	  of	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Medicine	  

	  

	  

Trainee	  Name:	  

	  

Jason	  Lang,	  PhD	  [research	  advisor,	  predoctoral	  study]	  	  

	  

Training	  Period:	   	  

1998	  -­‐	  1999	  

	  

Title	  of	  Research	  Project:	   Inter-­‐rater	  reliability	  of	  clinical	  diagnosis	  and	  DSM-­‐IV	  criteria	  for	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

autistic	  disorders:	  the	  DSM-­‐IV	  autism	  field	  trial	  

	  

Other	  Mentors:	   	  

Fred	  Volkmar,	  MD;	  Domenic	  Cicchetti,	  PhD	  

	  

Current	  Position:	  	   	  

Coordinator,	  (statewide)	  Connecticut	  Trauma	  Focused	  Cognitive	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Behavioral	  Therapy	  Program	  

	  	  

	  

c.	  	   Undergraduate	  (from	  year	  2000	  only):	  

	  

	  

	  

I	  had	  152	  Yale	  undergraduate	  students	  under	  my	  direct	  supervision	  between	  2000	  and	  2010.	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Supervision	  involved	  both	  a	  research	  project	  or	  research	  review,	  and	  a	  clinical	  aspect	  	  

	  

	  

	  

focused	  on	  the	  students’	  direct	  experiences	  in	  available	  clinical	  placements.	  	  

	  

	  

d.	  	   Web	  Courses	  (sample):	  

	  

	  

	  

“Social	  Development	  in	  Autism”	  	  

	  

	  

http://sciencestage.com/v/31024/social-­‐development-­‐in-­‐autism-­‐dr-­‐ami-­‐klin.html	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Overview	  of	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

http://sciencestage.com/v/31026/overview-­‐of-­‐autism,-­‐dr.-­‐ami-­‐klin.html	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“How	  Autism	  Creates	  Itself”	  

	  

	  

http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxPeachtree-­‐Ami-­‐Klin-­‐Autism-­‐D;search%3Atedxpeachtree	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

e.	  	   External	  Reading	  Committees:	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 41 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Jojanneke	  A.C.J.	  Bastiaansen:	  PhD	  reading	  committee,	  ‘Neural	  correlates	  of	  emotion	  processing	  

in	  autism,	  schizophrenia,	  and	  mental	  health’.	  Mentor:	  Christian	  Keysers,	  PhD.	  The	  

Netherlands	  Institute	  for	  Neuroscience	  at	  the	  Royal	  Netherlands	  Academy	  of	  Arts	  and	  	  

Sciences,	  and	  University	  Medical	  Center	  Groningen,	  The	  Netherlands.	  July	  2011.	  	  

	  

26.	   Invited	  regional,	  national	  and	  international	  clinical	  lectures,	  workshops	  and	  community	  outreach	  	  

	  

	  

(Over	  200	  Keynote	  Presentations,	  Invited	  Lectures	  and	  Daylong	  Clinical	  Workshops):	  

	  

2012	   	  

Center	  for	  Autism	  Research	  Lecture	  Series:	  “	  DSM-­‐V,	  Definitions	  and	  Persistent	  Realities”.	  	  

	  

	  

Children’s	  Hospital	  of	  Philadelphia	  and	  University	  of	  Pennsylvania.	  	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  April	  12,	  

	  

	  

2012.	  

2012	   	  

Wolfson	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  University	  of	  North	  Florida	  Autism	  Symposium:	  “The	  Challenges	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Social	  Learning	  in	  Adolescents	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  and	  Their	  Early	  Childhood”.	  	  

	  

	  

Jacksonville,	  FL,	  March	  14,	  2012.	  

2012	   	  

Kids	  Health	  First	  Annual	  Meeting,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “A	  new	  system	  of	  health	  care	  deliver	  for	  	  

	  

	  

infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  ASD	  Pediatrician’s	  Central	  Role”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  February	  28,	  2012.	  

2012	   	  

CARD,	  Albany,	  2012	  Annual	  Distinguished	  Guest	  Lecture	  in	  Autism:	  “DSM-­‐V,	  Definitions,	  	  

	  

	  

Realities,	  and	  Real	  Science	  We	  Need”.	  Albany,	  NY,	  January	  25,	  2012.	  

2011	   	  

Simons	  Foundation	  Autism	  Research	  Initiative,	  Invitational	  Workshop	  on	  ‘Autism	  Biomarkers’:	  

‘The	  metrics	  of	  sociability:	  quantification	  of	  social	  entrainment	  in	  typical	  and	  atypical	  	  

development”.	  Simons	  Center	  for	  Geometry	  and	  Physics,	  Stony	  Brook,	  NY,	  July	  22-­‐24,	  2011.	  	  

2011	   	  

Georgia	  Council	  on	  Developmental	  Disabilities,	  Invited	  Address:	  “Challenges	  and	  Opportunities	  

in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  New	  models	  of	  health	  care	  delivery”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  July	  22,	  2011.	  	  	  

2011	   	  

Daylong	  research	  and	  clinical	  workshop,	  2011	  Florida	  State	  University	  Training	  Institute	  on	  	  

	  

	  

Autism:	  “New	  Research	  on	  Social	  Engagement	  Deficits	  in	  Young	  Children	  with	  Autism:	  

Implications	  for	  Clinical	  Practice”.	  Tallahassee,	  FL,	  June	  24,	  2011.	  

2011	   	  

Community	  Physician	  Advisory	  Council	  (CPAC)	  Retreat:	  “Infants	  at	  Risk”.	  Buford,	  GA,	  April	  13,	  	  

	  

	  

2011.	  

2011	   	  

Fordham	  University,	  Losniños	  Services,	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  Keynote	  Address	  and	  Award:	  

	  “Annual	  Award	  for	  Clinical	  Science,	  Service	  and	  Advocacy	  on	  Behalf	  of	  Individuals	  with	  Autism”.	  	  

	  

	  

Keynote	  Address:	  ‘Autism:	  DSM-­‐V	  Definitions,	  Realities	  and	  Real	  Science	  We	  Need’.	  Eighth	  

	  Annual	  Young	  Child	  Expo	  &	  Conference,	  April	  7	  2011,	  New	  York	  City,	  NY.	  	  

2011	   	  

Dekalb	  Autism	  Support	  Group,	  Marcus	  Autism	  Center:	  “Baby	  Steps:	  Diagnosing	  Autism	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Children	  within	  the	  First	  Year	  of	  Life”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  April	  6,	  2011.	  

2010	  

YAI	  Network	  Annual	  Conference,	  Daylong	  Workshop:	  “Contemporary	  issues	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  

disorders”.	  New	  York	  City,	  November	  10,	  2010.	  	  

2010	  

Foote	  School:	  “Integrating	  children	  with	  autism	  in	  the	  school	  environment”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  

October	  12,	  2010.	  	  

2010	  

IX	  International	  Congress,	  Autism-­‐Europe:	  “A	  discussion	  forum	  for	  adults	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  

disorders	  from	  Slovenia”.	  Catania,	  Italy,	  October	  9,	  2010.	  	  

2010	  

Asperger’s	  Association	  of	  New	  England,	  Annual	  Conference,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “DSM-­‐V,	  

Definitions,	  Realities,	  and	  Real	  Science	  We	  Need”.	  Marborough,	  MA,	  September	  25,	  2010.	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 42 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	5  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2010	   2010	   2009	   2009	   2009	   2008	   2008	   2008	   2008	   2008	   2008:	   2008:	   2008:	   2008:	   2008:	   2008:	  
2008:	  

2010	  National	  Autism	  Conference,	  Pennsylvania	  State	  University:	  “Clinical	  and	  research	  issues	   in	  infancy	  and	  toddlerhood	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  State	  College,	  PA,	   August	  2,	  2010.	  	   Opportunity	  House	  (Residential	  Units	  for	  Adults	  with	  Autism):	  “Challenges	  and	  opportunities	  for	   middle	  age	  individuals	  with	  autism”,	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  May	  24,	  2010.	  	   District	  75	  Schools	  of	  New	  York	  City	  Annual	  Administrators	  Meeting,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Social	   development	  and	  social	  skills	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  highlights	  of	  current	  research	  and	   implications	  for	  educational	  programming”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  September	  2,	  2009.	  	   Commonwealth	  of	  Pennsylvania	  Department	  of	  Education,	  2009	  National	  Autism	  Conference:	   Progress	  Through	  Partnership,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Clinical	  implications	  of	  new	  research	  on	   infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  State	  College,	  PA,	  August	  3,	  2009.	  	   Eastern	  Illinois	  University:	  “Clinical	  management	  of	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	   Disorders”.	  Charleston,	  IL,	  May	  13,	  2009.	   Shoreline	  Child	  Study	  Group,	  Guilford	  Police	  Building:	  “Awareness	  of	  autism	  in	  our	  community”.	   Guilford,	  CT,	  December,	  11,	  2008.	   Morristown	  Memorial	  Hospital,	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorder,	  The	  State-­‐of-­‐the-­‐art	   Conference:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorder-­‐Not	  Otherwise	   Specified:	  Diagnosis	  and	  Assessment”.	  Morristown,	  NJ,	  November	  20,	  2008.	   Guilford	  Community	  TV:	  “Public	  Awareness	  of	  Autism”.	  Program,	  Guilford,	  CT,	  November	  18,	   2008.	   Le	  Centre	  de	  Formacion	  et	  de	  Recherche	  Abe	  Bold,	  Miriam	  Foundation,	  Colloque	  2008:	  “Some	   priorities	  for	  Educational	  and	  Treatment	  Programs	  for	  Higher	  Functioning	  Individuals	  with	   Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders”.	  Montreal,	  Canada,	  October	  30-­‐31,	  2008.	   The	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center	  Lecture	  Series	  at	  Greenwich	  Hospital:	  “Optimizing	  Outcomes	  in	   Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders”.	  Greenwich,	  CT,	  October	  28,	  2010.	   Inaugural	  Pennsylvania	  Autism	  Training	  Conference,	  Pennsylvania	  Department	  of	  Public	   Welfare,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Differential	  Diagnosis	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  and	  Treatment	   of	  Challenging	  Behaviors”.	  Lancaster,	  PA,	  May	  29,	  2008.	   Inaugural	  Pennsylvania	  Autism	  Training	  Conference,	  Pennsylvania	  Department	  of	  Public	   Welfare,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Real-­‐Life	  Skills	  and	  Circumscribed	  Interests	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	   Disorders”.	  Lancaster,	  PA,	  May	  28,	  2008.	   The	  Southern	  Connecticut	  Consortium	  for	  Staff	  Development:	  “Understanding	  and	  treating	   autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Stratford,	  CT,	  May	  9,	  2008.	   Chapel	  Haven	  Annual	  Parent	  Meeting:	  “Lessons	  from	  research	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	   focus	  on	  transition	  and	  adulthood”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  April	  25,	  2008.	   Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center	  Conference,	  The	  Road	  to	  Post	  Secondary	  Education:	  What	  Parents	  Need	   to	  Know	  to	  Prepare	  Students	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  “The	  role	  of	  assessment	  in	   planning	  post-­‐secondary	  education”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  April	  25,	  2008.	   UJA-­‐Federation	  Autism	  Symposium,	  From	  the	  Lab	  to	  the	  Field:	  Applying	  Research	  on	  Best	   Practices	  in	  Community-­‐Based	  Settings,	  New	  York	  City:	  “Some	  priorities	  for	  educational	  and	   treatment	  programs	  for	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  April	  8,	   2008.	   Wilton	  Public	  Schools:	  “Social	  development	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorder;	  and	  Priorities	  for	   educational	  and	  treatment	  programming	  in	  the	  school	  setting”.	  Wilton,	  CT,	  March	  31,	  2008.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 43 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	6  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2008:	   2008:	  
2008:	  	  
2008:	  	   2007:	   2007:	  
2007:	   2007:	   2007:	  
2007:	   2007:	   2007:	   2007:	   2007:	   2007:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	  

The	  Foundation	  School:	  “Translating	  research	  into	  best	  practices	  in	  the	  classroom”.	  Orange,	  CT,	   February	  1,	  2008.	   15th	  Annual	  Centers	  for	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Disabilities	  (CARDs)	  of	  Florida,	  Keynote	  Address:	   “Some	  priorities	  for	  educational	  and	  treatment	  programs	  for	  higher	  functioning	  individuals	  with	   Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders”.	  Orlando,	  FL,	  January	  27,	  2008.	   Jewish	  Family	  &	  Children’s	  Services:	  “Autism,	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome	  and	  related	  conditions:	   Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  and	  treatment	  and	  interventions”.	  Princeton,	  NJ,	  January	  24,	   2008.	   Jewish	  Family	  &	  Children’s	  Services:	  “The	  two	  endpoints	  of	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  Exciting	   new	  developments	  and	  new	  challenges”.	  Princeton,	  NJ,	  January	  23,	  2008.	  	   ARC	  Greenwich	  Autism	  Program	  and	  Autism	  Speaks:	  “Autism	  Every	  Day:	  The	  Early	  Years	  and	   Beyond”.	  Greenwich,	  CT,	  November	  29,	  2007.	   Ohel	  Bais	  Ezra	  (Children’s	  Home	  and	  Family	  Services),	  Baruch	  College:	  “Implications	  of	  current	   research	  for	  the	  assessment	  and	  treatment	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	   New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  November	  15,	  2007.	   Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center	  Conference	  on	  Autism	  in	  Infants	  and	  Young	  Children:	  “Research	  in	   infants	  at	  risk	  for	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  November	  9,	  2007.	   Sheppard	  Pratt	  Health	  System:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome	  through	  the	  lifespan:	  clinical	  implications	   of	  research”.	  Baltimore,	  MD,	  October	  5,	  2007.	   Autism	  Speaks	  and	  Clínica	  Mexicana	  de	  Autismo.	  Universidad	  Iberoamericana:	  “Autism	   Spectrum	  Disorders:	  Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  and	  treatment	  interventions”.	  Mexico	  City,	   July	  4,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Albany,	  NY,	  May	  22,	  2007.	   Bluegrass	  Regional	  Mental	  Health	  –	  Mental	  Retardation	  Board:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	   syndrome:	  Advances	  in	  understanding	  and	  interventions”.	  Lexington,	  KY,	  April	  19,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Jacksonville,	  FL,	  February	  8,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Orlando,	  FL,	  February	  7,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Los	  Angeles,	  CA,	  January	  26,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  San	  Francisco,	  CA,	  January	  25,	  2007.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  December	  15,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Suffern,	  NY,	  December	  13,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Edison,	  NJ,	  December	  13,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Louisville,	  KY,	  December	  1,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Saint	  Louis,	  MO,	  November	  30,	  2006.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 44 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	7  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2006:	   2006:	   2006:	  
2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	  
2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	  

New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Memphis,	  TN,	  November	  29,	  2006.	   New	  Jersey	  Psychological	  Association:	  “Autism	  and	  related	  conditions:	  clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  treatment	  and	  intervention,	  and	  research	  highlights”.	  Iselin,	  NJ,	  October	  28,	  2006.	   Columbus	  Children’s	  Autism	  Conference.	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Understanding	   and	  educating	  individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Columbus,	  OH,	  October	  26,	   2006.	   Columbus	  Children’s	  Hospital:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  A	  transition	  plan	  into	  adulthood”.	   Columbus,	  OH,	  October	  25,	  2006.	   National	  Security	  Agency:	  “Developmental	  disabilities:	  transition	  into	  adulthood”.	  Hanover,	  MD,	   July	  28,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Burlington,	  VT,	  May	  24,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  San	  Antonio,	  TX,	  May	  19,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Tulsa,	  OK,	  May	  18,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Memphis,	  TN,	  May	  17,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Richmond,	  VA,	  May	  12,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Minneapolis,	  MN,	  April	  27,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  April	  26,	  2006.	   Connecticut	  General	  Assembly,	  State	  Capitol,	  Legislative	  Informational	  Hearing,	  Public	  Health	   Committee:	  “The	  needs	  of	  adults	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  without	  mental	  retardation”.	   Hartford,	  CT,	  March	  6,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  February	  10,	  2006.	  February	  3,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Baltimore,	  MD,	  February	  3,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  St.	  Louis,	  MO,	  January	  26,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Kansas	  City,	  Mo,	  January	  25,	  2006.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”	  Phoenix,	  AZ,	  December	  9,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Los	  Angeles,	  CA,	  December	  8,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  San	  Diego,	  CA,	  December	  7,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Buffalo,	  NY,	  December	  1,	  2005.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 45 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	8  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	  
2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	  	  
2005:	   	  
2005:	   	  
2005:	   2005:	   2005:	  

Autism	  Society	  of	  Delaware:	  “What	  is	  Asperger	  Syndrome?”.	  Dover,	  DE,	  November	  17,	  2005.	   Delaware	  Autism	  Program,	  Autism	  Society	  of	  Delaware,	  and	  Center	  for	  Disabilities	  Studies	  of	   University	  of	  Delaware:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  issues	  in	  diagnosis	  and	  intervention,	  a	  daylong	   workshop”.	  Dover,	  DE,	  November	  17,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Portland,	  ME,	  November	  16,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Danbury,	  CT,	  November	  4,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  October	  26,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Detroit,	  MI,	  October	  25,	  2005.	   Benhaven	  School	  and	  Residences:	  “Clinical	  implications	  of	  current	  social	  cognitive	  research	  on	   autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  October	  19,	  2005.	   Annual	  National	  Alliance	  for	  Autism	  Research	  Keynote	  Address	  –	  Fifteenth	  Annual	  Educational	   Profile	  of	  School	  Age	  Children	  with	  High	  Functioning	  Autism,	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome	  and	  other	   Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders.	  Eastern	  Suffolk	  BOCES:	  “What’s	  hot	  and	  what’s	  not	  in	  the	   science	  of	  autism”.	  Holbrook,	  NY,	  October	  24,	  2005.	   Montreal	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  McGill	  University:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  clinical	  features	  and	   clinical	  issues”.	  Montreal,	  Quebec,	  Canada,	  August	  26,	  2005.	   2005	  National	  Autism	  Conference,	  Pennsylvania	  State	  University:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	   features,	  assessment,	  and	  treatment/intervention”.	  State	  College,	  PA,	  August	  3,	  2005.	   Autismo,	  Centro	  Conviver:	  “Importância	  do	  Diagnóstico	  Precoce	  de	  Crianças	  com	  Autismo”	   [“The	  importance	  of	  early	  diagnosis	  in	  children	  with	  autism”].	  Curitiba,	  Brazil,	  June	  30,	  2005.	   Simpósio	  Internacional	  Diagnóstico	  e	  Tratamento	  do	  Autismo:	  Um	  desafio	  para	  o	  Brazil,	  Casa	  da	   Esperança:	  “Disfunção	  do	  olhar	  do	  portador	  do	  autismo”	  [“Seeing	  in	  individuals	  with	  autism”]	   and	  “Teoria	  da	  Mente”	  [“Theory	  of	  Mind”]	  [workshops	  on	  implications	  of	  social	  cognitive	   research	  to	  daily	  work	  with	  individuals	  with	  autism].	  Fortaleza,	  Brazil,	  June	  24,	  2005.	   Simpósio	  Internacional,	  Diagnóstico	  Precoce	  de	  Autismo:	  Um	  desafio	  para	  o	  Brasil.	  Simpósio	   Internacional	  Diagnóstico	  Precoce	  de	  Autismo:	  Desafio	  para	  Educação	  e	  Saúde.	  Faculdade	  de	   Educação	  da	  Pontifícia	  Universidade	  Católica:	  “Importância	  do	  Diagnóstico	  Precoce	  de	  Crianças	   com	  Autismo”	  [“The	  importance	  of	  early	  diagnosis	  in	  children	  with	  autism”].	  Porto	  Alegre,	   Brazil,	  June	  23,	  2005.	   Filogênese	  e	  Ontogênese	  do	  Aprender:	  uma	  reflexão.	  I	  Simpósio	  sobre	  Desenvolvimento	   Humano	  Da	  Universidade	  Presbiteriana	  MacKenzie:	  “Autismo:	  o	  que	  a	  pesquisa	  nos	  informa	   sobre	  a	  natureza	  das	  alterações	  do	  desenvolvimento	  social”	  [“Autism:	  what	  research	  informs	  us	   about	  disruptions	  in	  social	  development”].	  São	  Paulo,	  Brazil,	  June	  22,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Austin,	  TX,	  May	  25,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Dallas,	  TX	  May	  24,	  2005.	   The	  4th	  Annual	  Conference	  on	  Developmental	  Disabilities.	  Center	  for	  the	  Disabled:	  “Asperger’s	   syndrome”.	  Albany,	  NY,	  May	  13,	  2005.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 46 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  2	  	  	9  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	  	  
2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	  
2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	  

New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”,	  Providence,	  RI,	  May	  5,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Springfield,	  MA,	  May	  4,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Marlborough,	  MA,	  May	  3,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  April	  8,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  March	  30,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Worcester,	  MA,	  March	  29,	  2005.	   Connecticut	  General	  Assembly	  Legislative	  Informational	  Hearing,	  Committee	  on	  Higher	   Education	  and	  Employment	  Advancement:	  “The	  needs	  of	  adults	  with	  autism	  spectrum	   disorders	  without	  mental	  retardation”.	  Hartford,	  CT,	  February	  10,	  2005.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Portland,	  ME,	  December	  9,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Manchester,	  NH,	  December	  8,	  2004	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Boston,	  MA,	  December	  3,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  November	  17,	  2004.	   Autism	  Spectrum	  Resource	  Center:	  “Understanding	  circumscribed	  interests	  in	  autism	  spectrum	   disorders:	  Implications	  for	  educational	  interventions”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  November	  4,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Pittsburgh,	  PA,	  May	  21,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Lancaster,	  PA,	  May	  20,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  May	  19,	  2004.	   	   One-­‐day	  Seminar	  for	  Mental	  Health	  Professionals,	  Teachers,	  Parents,	  and	  Children’s	  Service	   Providers	  provided	  by	  the	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Section,	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center	  (Course	   directors:	  Fred	  Volkmar	  and	  Ami	  Klin):	  “Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  an	  Update	  on	   Interventions”.	  Westbrook,	  CT,	  May	  5,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Cincinnati,	  OH,	  April	  22,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Columbus,	  OH,	  April	  21,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Greenbay,	  WI,	  April	  2,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Minneapolis,	  MN,	  April	  1,	  2004.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 47 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	  
2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	  
2003:	  

	   Jewish	  Social	  Service	  Agency	  of	  Metropolitan	  Washington:	  “Understanding	  and	  Treating	   Asperger	  Syndrome	  and	  other	  Severe	  Social	  Disabilities”.	  Chevy	  Chase,	  MD.	  March	  8,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  February	  26,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Tallahassee,	  FL,	  February	  25,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Miami,	  FL,	  February	  24,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Dallas,	  TX,	  January	  30,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Austin,	  TX,	  January	  29,	  2004.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  December	  5,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Lancaster,	  PA,	  December	  4,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Pittsburgh,	  PA,	  December	  3,	  2003.	  
	   Seventh	  International	  Autism	  Europe	  Congress:	  “Addressing	  parents’	  questions”.	  Lisbon,	   Portugal,	  November	  15,	  2003.	  
	   APPDA	  (Portuguese	  Association	  for	  Individuals	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders):	  “Autism	  and	   associated	  disorders:	  clinical	  assessment,	  treatment	  and	  interventions”.	  Lisbon,	  Portugal,	   November	  13,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  November	  21,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Madison,	  WI,	  November	  20,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Trenton,	  NJ,	  November	  7,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Pleasantville,	  NY,	  November	  6,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”,	  Minneapolis,	  MN,	  October	  2,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”.	  Sioux	  Falls,	  SD,	  September	  25,	  2003.	   New	  England	  Educational	  Institute.	  Bismarck,	  North	  Dakota:	  “Autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome:	   Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  and	  treatment/interventions”	  September	  24,	  2003.	  
	   The	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Resource	  Center	  of	  Greater	  New	  Haven:	  “Preparing	  advocates	  to	  help	   parents	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  to	  secure	  appropriate	  programs	  of	  intervention:	  the	  Individual	   Education	  Plan	  process”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  October	  23,	  2003.	  
	   American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  50th	  Anniversary	  Meeting:	  “Institute	  on	   Autism,	  Asperger	  syndrome,	  and	  related	  disorders”.	  Miami,	  FL,	  October	  17,	  2003.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 48 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	  
2002:	  
2002:	  

	   Education	  Connection,	  Connecticut	  Department	  of	  Education:	  “Autism	  and	  related	  conditions:	   workshop	  on	  clinical	  and	  management	  issues	  for	  directors	  of	  special	  services”.	  Lakeville,	  CT,	   May	  9,	  2003.	  
	   Autism	  Society	  of	  Minnesota	  Annual	  Conference:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  interventions,	  and	  highlights	  of	  clinical	  research”.	  Minneapolis,	  MN,	  April	  24,	  2003.	  
	   The	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders	  /	  International	  Disorders	  Association	  of	  Houston.	  Texas	   Medical	  Center:	  “Autism	  and	  related	  conditions:	  current	  research	  and	  choosing	  effective	   treatments”.	  Houston,	  TX,	  January	  25,	  2003.	  
	   The	  Asperger’s	  Association	  of	  New	  England	  8th	  Annual	  Conference:	  “Behavioral	  and	   neuroimaging	  studies	  of	  social	  cognition	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Waltham,	  MA,	   October	  26,	  2002.	  
	   The	  Geneva	  Centre	  International	  Symposium	  on	  Autism:	  A	  Global	  Perspective:	  “Treatment	  and	   educational	  interventions	  for	  individuals	  with	  severe	  social	  disabilities”.	  Toronto,	  Ontario,	   October	  25,	  2002.	  
	   The	  Gray	  Center	  for	  Social	  Learning	  and	  Understanding:	  “The	  social	  mind	  and	  the	  social	  brain:	   research	  and	  clinical	  implications”.	  Grand	  Rapids,	  MI,	  October	  16,	  2002.	  
	   Nefesh	  International:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Research	  and	  clinical	  practice”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	   October	  6,	  2002.	  
	   The	  MAAP	  Annual	  Conference:	  “The	  social	  mind	  and	  the	  social	  brain:	  lessons	  from	  autism”.	   Kansas	  City,	  MO,	  October	  4,	  2002.	  
	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Rockland	  Children’s	  Psychiatric	  Center:	  “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Orangeburg,	  NY,	   September	  10,	  2002.	  
	   The	  Sixth	  Annual	  S.	  Gail	  Mayfield	  Training	  Institute,	  Virginia	  Autism	  Resource	  Center	  and	   Grafton,	  Shenandoah	  University:	  “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Winchester,	  VA,	  July	  31	  and	  August	  1,	   2002.	  
	   Northwest	  Mental	  Health	  Institute:	  “Behavioral	  and	  neurobiological	  aspects	  of	  autism	  and	   related	  conditions”.	  Portland,	  OR,	  June	  28th,	  2002.	  
	   Institute	  on	  Autism	  at	  Florida	  State	  University:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  treatment,	  and	  research”.	  Tallahassee,	  FL,	  June	  20,	  2002.	  
	   Neurobiological	  Basis	  of	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  –	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Across	  the	   Lifespan.	  The	  Stanley	  S.	  Lamm	  Institute	  for	  Child	  Neurology	  and	  Developmental	  Medicine	  and	   Long	  Island	  College	  Hospital:	  “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Brooklyn,	  NY,	  May	  22,	  2002.	  
	   Neurobiological	  Basis	  of	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  –	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Across	  the	   Lifespan.	  The	  Stanley	  S.	  Lamm	  Institute	  for	  Child	  Neurology	  and	  Developmental	  Medicine	  and	   Long	  Island	  College	  Hospital:	  “Growing	  up	  with	  an	  autistic	  spectrum	  disorder”.	  Brooklyn,	  NY,	   May	  22,	  2002.	  
	   Neurobiological	  Basis	  of	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  –	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Across	  the	   Lifespan.	  The	  Stanley	  S.	  Lamm	  Institute	  for	  Child	  Neurology	  and	  Developmental	  Medicine	  and	   Long	  Island	  College	  Hospital:	  “Autism:	  Clinical	  issues	  across	  the	  lifespan”.	  Brooklyn,	  NY,	  May	  22,	   2002.	  
	   23rd	  Annual	  International	  Conference	  on	  Mental	  Retardation	  and	  Developmental	  Disabilities,	   National	  Institute	  for	  People	  with	  Disabilities:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  clinical	  features,	   educational	  interventions,	  and	  advocacy”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  May	  5,	  2002.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 49 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2002:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	  
2002:	   2002:	  
2002:	  
2002:	   2002:	  
2001:	  
2001:	   2001:	  
2001:	   2001:	  
2000:	   2000:	   2000:	   2000:	  

	   Spurwink	  Institute:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  implications	  of	  neuropsychological	  and	  social	   cognitive	  research	  for	  educational	  interventions”,	  Portland,	  ME,	  May	  4,	  2002.	  
	   Minnesota	  Association	  of	  Child	  Psychologists:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  and	  intervention”.	  Minneapolis,	  MN,	  April	  26,	  2002.	  
	   Connecticut	  Society	  of	  Pediatric	  Dentists.	  Yale	  New	  Haven	  Hospital:	  “Autism	  and	  related	   conditions:	  Suggestions	  for	  dental	  care	  providers”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  April	  10,	  2002.	  
	   Pennsylvania	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Service	  System	  Program,	  Training	  and	  Technical	  Assistance	   Institute.	  Center	  for	  Community	  Action	  and	  Research	  in	  Penn	  State	  Harrisburg’s	  School	  of	   Behavioral	  Sciences	  and	  Education:	  “Social	  characteristics	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  related	   conditions”.	  State	  College,	  PA,	  April	  4,	  2002.	  
	   7th	  Annual	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorder	  Symposium:	  “Intervention	  implications	  of	  recent	  social	   cognitive	  research	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Providence,	  RI,	  March	  15,	  2002.	  
	   The	  Connecticut	  State	  Department	  of	  Education	  (Special	  Education	  Resource	  Center):	   “Implications	  of	  current	  research	  for	  practitioners	  working	  with	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	   disorders”.	  Hartford,	  CT,	  February	  7,	  2002.	  
	   The	  State	  of	  Connecticut	  Department	  of	  Mental	  Retardation:	  “Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	   developmental	  disorders:	  An	  overview	  of	  assessment	  and	  treatment”.	  Norwich,	  CT,	  January	  24,	   2002.	  
	   The	  Connecticut	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Resource	  Center:	  “Treatment	  implications	  from	  new	  social	   cognitive	  research	  in	  autism”.	  Cheshire,	  CT,	  January	  23,	  2002.	  
	   The	  Connecticut	  State	  Department	  of	  Education	  (Special	  Education	  Resource	  Center,	  Directors	   of	  Special	  Education	  Meeting:	  “Assessment	  and	  treatment	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  and	  related	   disorders”.	  Farmington,	  CT,	  February	  7,	  2002.	  	  	  
	   The	  Maryland	  State	  Department	  of	  Education,	  the	  Intensive	  Behavior	  Management	  Program,	   and	  the	  [State	  of	  Maryland]	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  Administration:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	   clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  treatment,	  and	  research	  highlights”.	  Hagerstown,	  MD,	  November	   9	  -­‐	  10,	  2001.	  
	   Connecticut	  Community	  Providers	  Association:	  “Assessment	  and	  treatment	  of	  pervasive	   developmental	  disorders”.	  Farmington,	  CT,	  November	  2,	  2001.	  
	   Texas	  Medical	  Association,	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  Annual	  Meeting:	  “Autism	  and	  the	   pervasive	  developmental	  disorders:	  Concepts,	  assessment,	  and	  treatment”.	  Galveston,	  TX,	  July	   27,	  2001.	  
	   5th	  Annual	  Conference	  on	  Autism.	  Mount	  Sinai	  School	  of	  Medicine:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	   Clinical	  features	  and	  treatment	  guidelines”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  April	  22nd,	  2001.	  
	   Regional	  Autism	  Project,	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America:	  “Behavioral	  and	  neuroimaging	  studies	  of	   social	  cognition	  in	  autism:	  Implications	  for	  treatment	  and	  interventions”.	  Saint	  Paul,	  MN,	   January	  25,	  2001.	  
	   SERC,	  Connecticut	  State	  Department	  of	  Education:	  “Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  higher	  functioning	   autism”.	  Meriden,	  CT,	  December	  8,	  2000.	  
	   National	  Association	  for	  Continuing	  Education	  and	  University	  of	  Massachusetts	  Medical	  School:	   “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Washington,	  D.C.,	  November	  28,	  2000.	  
	   Autism	  Society	  of	  America,	  Providence,	  Rhode	  Island	  Chapter,	  and	  Developmental	  Disabilities	   Program,	  Bradley	  Hospital:	  “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Providence,	  RI,	  November	  15,	  2000.	  
	   Arc	  of	  Washington	  County:	  “Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Hagerstown,	  MD,	  June	  22,	  2000.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 50 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2000:	   2000:	  

2000:	  

2000:	  

2000:	   2000:	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	   New	  Jersey	  Association	  of	  School	  Psychologists	  Annual	  Meeting:	  ”Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	   features,	  assessment,	  and	  educational	  interventions”.	  Jamesburg,	  NJ,	  May	  5,	  2000.	  
	   Eagle	  Hill	  School’s	  Symposium	  2000:	  Strategies	  for	  Learning	  Disabilities	  in	  the	  Millennium.	  Eagle	   Hill	  School:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features	  and	  treatment/intervention	  guidelines;	  and	   Creating	  social	  understanding:	  Current	  research	  in	  basic	  mechanisms	  of	  socialization”.	   Greenwich,	  CT,	  April	  28,	  2000.	  
	   Training	  workshops	  on	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  neurobiology	  of	  autism	  and	  related	   conditions,	  Foundation	  for	  Education	  and	  Research	  Concerning	  Children	  and	  Adolescents:	   “Overview	  of	  clinical	  assessment	  and	  intervention	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Modena,	   Italy,	  March	  21,	  2000.	  
	   Second	  annual	  Reaching	  for	  Potential:	  Strategies	  and	  methodologies	  for	  children	  and	  youth	   with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Colorado	  Department	  of	  Education:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome:	   Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  update	  on	  research”.	  Denver,	  CO,	  February	  24	  -­‐ 25,	  2000.	  
	   National	  Institute	  for	  People	  with	  Disabilities:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	   assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  update	  on	  research”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  February	  7,	  2000.	  
	   Autism:	  Current	  Status	  and	  Future	  Trends,	  The	  Center	  for	  the	  Study	  of	  Human	  Development	  at	   Brown	  University,	  The	  Rhode	  Island	  Autism	  Project,	  and	  the	  Groden	  Center:	  ”	  Creating	  social	   understanding:	  Social,	  cognitive,	  and	  neuroimaging	  in	  autism”.	  Providence,	  RI,	  February	  5,	   2000.	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Four	  Winds	  Hospital:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	  and	  treatment	  and	  	   intervention	  guidelines”.	  Katonah,	  NY,	  November	  19,	  1999.	   The	  Jewish	  Community	  Center,	  full-­‐day	  workshop:	  “Treatment	  approaches	  for	  individuals	  with	  	   Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Clifton,	  NJ,	  November	  3rd,	  1999.	  	   6th	  Annual	  Jewish	  Social	  Service	  Agency	  of	  Metropolitan	  Washington	  Professional	  Symposium:	  	   Helping	  your	  child	  with	  Asperger	  syndrome	  understand	  social	  events	  and	  concepts:	  “Social	  skills	   training	  for	  the	  treatment	  of	  individuals	  with	  Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  October	  	   28,	  1999.	  	   The	  American	  Psychiatric	  Association	  and	  The	  Ohio	  Psychiatric	  Association,	  Salt	  Fork	  State	  Park	  	   Lodge,	  Invited	  address	  at	  Psychiatric	  Care	  Across	  the	  Life	  Cycle:	  “Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  r	   elated	  disorders:	  Clinical	  features	  and	  highlights	  of	  current	  	r   esearch”.	  Cambridge,	  OH,	  October	  	   10,	  1999.	  	   ASPEN	  (Asperger	  Syndrome	  Education	  Network)	  Inc.:	  “Beyond	  the	  diagnosis:	  Guidelines	  for	  	   Intervention”.	  Edison,	  NJ,	  October	  3,	  1999.	  	   2nd	  Annual	  Mark	  P.	  Wilson	  Memorial	  Grand	  Rounds,	  Section	  of	  Adolescent	  Medicine,	  Children’s	  	   Mercy	  Hospital:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome:	  Diagnostic	  features,	  clinical	  assessment,	  treatment,	  and	  	   research	  highlights”.	  Kansas	  City,	  MO,	  September	  30,	  1999.	   National	  Association	  for	  Continuing	  Education	  and	  the	  University	  of	  Massachusetts	  Medical	  	   School,	  Featured	  speaker	  at	  Across	  the	  Spectrum:	  Learning	  Disabilities,	  ADHD,	  and	  Asperger’s	  	   Disorder	  -­‐	  Current	  Research	  and	  Practice:	  “Asperger’s	  disorder:	  diagnosis,	  neurobiology,	  and	  	   treatment”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  September	  23,	  1999.	   The	  Third	  Annual	  S.	  Gail	  Mayfield	  Institute,	  Virginia	  Autism	  Resource	  Center,	  Shenandoah	  	   University:	  “The	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders,	  and	  Neurobiological	  issues	  in	  autism”.	  Winchester,	  	   VA,	  August	  2,	  1999.	  	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 51 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Course	  provided	  at	  the	  First	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders	  Symposium,	  Association	  of	  	   Parents	  and	  Friends	  of	  the	  Exceptional	  Child	  and	  Mackenzie	  University	  Post-­‐Graduate	  programs	   in	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Autism	  and	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders:	   Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  research	  update”.	  São	  Paulo,	  Brazil,	  July	  1-­‐2,	  	   1999.	   National	  Autism	  and	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  Conference,	  Autism/Asperger	  Syndrome	  Resource	  	   Center,	  Kansas	  University	  Medical	  Center,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Research	  issues	  in	  autism	  and	  	   Asperger	  syndrome:	  Neuropsychology,	  social	  cognition,	  neuroimaging,	  and	  genetics”.	  Kansas	  	   City,	  KS,	  June	  24,	  1999.	   Autism:	  Shaping	  the	  Future	  Today,	  Emory	  Autism	  Resource	  Center	  and	  Emory	  University	  School	  	   of	  Medicine,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  and	  research	  issues”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  	   June	  19,	  1999.	   Asperger	  Syndrome	  Connections	  1999,	  The	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  Association	  of	  New	  England,	  	   Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Highlights	  of	  current	  research	  and	  guidelines	  for	  	   intervention”.	  June	  12,	  1999.	   The	  Jewish	  Family	  Services:	  “Autism	  and	  related	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders:	  A	  	   	   workshop	  for	  parents	  and	  professionals”.	  Clifton,	  NJ,	  June	  4,	  1999.	   Annual	  conference	  of	  the	  South	  Dakota	  University	  Affiliated	  Program	  (Autism),	  Department	  of	  	   Pediatrics,	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  The	  University	  of	  South	  Dakota:	  “Autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  	   Differential	  diagnosis,”	  Keynote	  address,	  and	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Diagnosis	  and	  intervention	  	   techniques”.	  Sioux	  Falls,	  SD,	  April	  29,	  1999.	   Autism	  Preconference,	  Contemporary	  Forums	  8th	  Annual	  Conference	  and	  National	  Institute	  of	  	   Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development:	  The	  Child	  with	  Special	  Needs:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  	   Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  highlights	  of	  current	  research”.	  Washington	  	   D.C.,	  April	  24,	  1999.	  	   The	  Broome-­‐Tioga	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America	  1999	  Spring	  Conference:	  “Autism	  and	  related	  	   conditions:	  Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  research”.	  Binghamton,	  NY,	  April	  	   23,	  1999.	   1999	  Annual	  Conference	  on	  Learning	  Disabilities	  for	  Parents,	  Persons	  with	  LD/ADHD,	  and	  	   Professionals,	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  Connecticut,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  	   syndrome:	  An	  update	  on	  clinical	  and	  research	  issues”.	  Hartford,	  CT,	  March	  27,	  1999.	   5th	  Annual	  Professional	  Symposium	  of	  the	  Jewish	  Social	  Service	  Agency	  of	  Metropolitan	  	   	   Washington:	  “Understanding	  and	  treating	  Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  other	  pervasive	  	   	   developmental	  disorders	  in	  children	  and	  adolescents”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  March	  18,	  1999.	  	   Yale	  University	  Child	  Study	  Center	  Conference	  on	  Autism,	  Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  related	  	   conditions:	  “Guidelines	  for	  treatment	  and	  intervention	  for	  more	  able	  individuals	  with	  severe	  	   social	  disabilities”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  March	  13,	  1999.	   Birth	  to	  Three	  providers,	  State	  of	  Connecticut,	  Department	  of	  Mental	  Retardation,	  DMR:	  	   “Interventions	  for	  children	  with	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  January	  13,	  	   1999.	   3rd	  Annual	  Symposium,	  “Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  high	  functioning	  autism:	  Toward	  an	  	   	   understanding	  of	  the	  condition	  and	  improvement	  of	  service	  provision,”	  The	  Cleveland	  Clinic	  	   Foundation	  and	  the	  Autism	  Society	  of	  Greater	  Cleveland,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  	   	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 52 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	5  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	  assessment,	  intervention,	  and	  research	  highlights”.	  Cleveland,	  OH,	  	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

December	  11,	  1998.	   Telemedicine	  Broadcast,	  Cleveland	  Clinic	  Westlake,	  and	  Learning	  Assessment	  Clinic	  3rd	  Annual	  	  

	  

	  

Seminar,	  The	  Cleveland	  Clinic	  Foundation,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Treatment	  and	  Intervention:	  	  

	  

	  

Some	  guidelines	  for	  parents.	  “Living	  with	  high	  functioning	  autism,	  Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  	  

	  

	  

PDD”.	  Cleveland,	  OH,	  December	  10,	  1998.	  	  

1998:	   	  

State-­‐wide	  teleconference,	  Instructional	  Support	  System	  of	  Pennsylvania,	  Pennsylvania	  	   	  

	  

	  

Department	  of	  Education:	  “Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Implications	  for	  education”.	  Gibsonia,	  PA,	  	  

	  

	  

December	  8,	  1998.	  	  

1998:	   	  

Current	  Trends	  in	  Autism	  Conference,	  The	  Autism	  Research	  Foundation	  (Massachusetts	  General	  

	  

	  

Hospital):	  “Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  and	  research	  issues”.	  Danvers,	  MA,	  November	  6,	  	  

	  

	  

1998.	  

1998:	   	  

New	  Mexico	  Autism	  Conference,	  “Autism	  Over	  the	  Lifetime”,	  The	  New	  Mexico	  Autism	  Society:	  	  

	  

	  

“Intervention	  strategies	  for	  children	  and	  adults	  with	  Asperger’s	  syndrome”.	  Albuquerque,	  NM,	  	  

	  

	  

October	  24,	  1998.	  

1998:	   	  

New	  Mexico	  Autism	  Conference,	  “Autism	  Over	  the	  Lifetime”,	  the	  New	  Mexico	  Autism	  Society,	  	  

	  

	  

Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger’s	  syndrome”.	  Albuquerque,	  NM,	  October	  24,	  1998.	  

1998:	   	  

Nassau/Suffolk	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America:	  “Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	  treatment,	  	  

	  

	  

and	  educational	  interventions”.	  Long	  Island,	  RI,	  October	  4,	  1998.	  

1998:	  	   	  

The	  Child	  with	  Special	  Needs:	  The	  National	  Conference	  Addressing	  Issues	  in	  Early	  Development.	  

	  

	  

Contemporary	  Forums	  and	  the	  National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development:	  	  

	  

	  

“Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Overview	  of	  clinical	  features,	  assessment	  and	  intervention,	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

highlights	  of	  current	  research”.	  Anaheim,	  CA,	  April	  28,	  1998.	  

1996:	   	  

Connecticut	  Alliance	  for	  the	  Mentally	  Ill	  (CAMI)’s	  annual	  conference	  “Children’s	  Mental	  Health:	  	  

	  

	  

Pathway	  to	  Success”:	  “Diagnosis	  and	  treatment	  of	  autism	  and	  other	  pervasive	  developmental	  	  

	  

	  

disorders”.	  Hartford,	  CT,	  October	  5,	  1996.	  

1992:	  	   	  

Hillel,	  Yale	  University:	  “The	  little	  size	  of	  a	  cataclysmic	  reality:	  Children	  of	  the	  Holocaust”.	  New	  	  

	  

	  

Haven,	  CT,	  March	  30,	  1992.	  

1990:	   	  

B'Nai	  B'rith	  Women	  of	  Greater	  New	  Haven	  meeting	  on	  "The	  Realities	  of	  Raising	  Emotionally	  	  

	  

	  

Healthy	  Children,"	  Yale	  University:	  “Cross-­‐cultural	  perspectives	  on	  emotional	  development”.	  	  

	  

	  

New	  Haven,	  CT,	  November	  2,	  1990.	  

	  

27.	   Invited	  research	  presentations	  in	  national	  and	  international	  meetings	  and	  professional	  organizations	  

	  

(Over	  150	  Keynote	  Presentations,	  Invited	  lectures,	  Grand	  Rounds	  and	  Presentations	  in	  Professional	  	  

	  

Meetings):	  

	  

2012	   	  

Morehouse	  School	  of	  Medicine,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics	  Grand	  Rounds:	  “	  A	  new	  system	  of	  	  

	  

	  

healthcare	  delivery	  for	  infants	  &	  toddlers	  with	  autism.”	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  May	  23,	  2012.	  

2012	   	  

Center	  for	  Autism	  Research	  Lecture	  Series:	  “New	  Research	  on	  Social	  Engagement	  Deficits	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Young	  Children	  with	  Autism:	  Implications	  for	  Clinical	  Practice”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  April	  12,	  2012.	  

2012	   	  

NIH	  Biomarkers	  Consortium:	  “Diagnostic	  and	  Prescriptive	  Quantifiers	  of	  Social	  Disability	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Autism”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  March	  28,	  2012.	  

2012	   	  

Wolfson	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  University	  of	  North	  Florida	  Autism	  Symposium:	  “The	  Unfolding	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Social	  Learning	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorder”.	  Jacksonville,	  FL,	  March	  14,	  2012.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 53 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	6  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2012	   	  

	  

	  

2012	   	  

	  

	  

2012	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

2011	   	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

2011	   	   2011	   	  

2011	   	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

2011	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Wolfson	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  University	  of	  North	  Florida	  Autism	  Symposium:	  “Science-­‐based	  	   Early	  Detection	  of	  Autism	  in	  the	  First	  Year	  of	  Life”.	  	   Jacksonville,	  FL,	  March	  14,	  2012.	   Simon’s	  Regression	  Workshop:	  “	  What	  is	  that	  we	  call	  ‘regression’	  in	  autism:	  the	  ‘developmental’	   in	  neurodevelopmental	  disorders”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  February	  12	  –	  13,	  2012.	   CARD,	  Albany,	  2012	  Annual	  Distinguished	  Guest	  Lecture	  in	  Autism:	  “New	  Research	  on	  Social	  	   Engagement	  Deficits	  in	  Young	  Children	  with	  Autism:	  Implications	  for	  Clinical	  Practice”.	  Albany,	  	   NY,	  January	  25,	  2012.	   Cell	  Symposia	  2011:	  “New	  Research	  on	  Social	  Engagement	  Deficits	  in	  Young	  Children	  with	  	   Autism:	  Implications	  for	  Clinical	  Practice”.	  Arlington,	  VA,	  November	  11,	  2011.	   15th	  Annual	  Conference,	  Interdisciplinary	  Council	  on	  Developmental	  and	  Learning	  Disabilities:	  	   “Early	  Diagnostic	  Indicators	  and	  Predictors	  of	  Outcome	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders”.	  	   	   Washington	  D.C.,	  November	  11,	  2011.	   TedXPeachtree:	  “How	  Autism	  Created	  Itself”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  November	  4,	  2011.	   Georgia	  Chapter	  of	  AAP,	  keynote	  address:	  Research	  on	  Social	  Engagement	  Deficits	  in	  Young	  	   Children	  with	  Autism:	  Implications	  for	  Clinical	  Practice”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  November	  3,	  2011.	   Autism	  Speaks	  Board	  Meeting:	  “	  	   American	  Psychological	  Association	  119th	  Annual	  Convention,	  Invited	  Presentation	  for	  Division	   33:	  ‘Early	  Diagnostic	  Indicators	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  Implications	  for	  a	  New	  Model	  of	   Health	  Care	  Delivery’.	  Washington,	  DC,	  August	  6,	  2011.	  	   National	  Autism	  Conference,	  Pennsylvania	  State	  University,	  Pennsylvania	  Department	  of	  	   Education:	  “Clinical	  and	  research	  issues	  in	  infancy	  and	  toddlerhood	  of	  children	  with	  autism	   spectrum	  disorders”.	  State	  College,	  PA,	  August	  1,	  2011.	  	   Opening	  Keynote	  Presentation,	  42nd	  National	  Conference	  of	  the	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America:	   “Translational	  social	  neuroscience,	  community	  impact,	  and	  opportunities	  for	  optimizing	  the	   outcome	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism	  through	  early	  diagnosis	  and	  intervention”.	  Orlando,	  FL,	  July	   7,	  2011.	  	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Department	  of	  Psychiatry	  and	  Behavioral	  Sciences,	  Emory	  University	  School	  of	   Medicine:	  ‘Diagnostic	  indicators	  of	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  6	  months	  of	  life	  and	  the	  bioethical	   imperative	  to	  implement	  early	  intervention’.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  June	  8,	  2011.	  	   Seventeenth	  Annual	  Eden	  Autism	  Services	  and	  Princeton	  Lecture	  Series,	  Keynote	  Address	  and	   Award	  (Emily	  Cavaliere	  Puzio	  and	  Frank	  Mauro	  Puzio	  Award	  for	  Commitment	  and	  Dedication	  to	   Improving	  the	  Quality	  of	  Life	  for	  Individuals	  with	  Autism):	  “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	   outcome	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  on	  the	  autism	  spectrum”.	  Princeton	  University,	  Princeton,	  NJ,	   June	  3,	  2011.	   Scottish	  Autism	  National	  Conference,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	   outcome	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  on	  the	  autism	  spectrum”.	  Glasgow,	  Scotland,	  May	  22,	  2011.	   Enlightment	  Luncheon:	  “Transforming	  Services	  for	  Children	  with	  Autism”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  April	  11,	  	   2011.	  	   Simons	  Foundation	  Autism	  Research	  Initiative,	  Invitational	  Workshop	  on	  the	  Neuroscience	  of	  	   Attention:	  “Social	  Visual	  Attention	  and	  Entrainment	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  	   Disorders”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  February	  28,	  2011.	   The	  New	  York	  Academy	  of	  Sciences,	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  Early	  Behavioral	  Predictors	   and	  Biomarkers:	  “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	  outcome	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	   autism”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  December	  1,	  2010.	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 54 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	7  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2010	   	  

	  

	  

2009	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2009	  

2009	  

2009	  

2009	   	  

	  

	  

2009	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2009	   	  

	  

	  

2009	  

2009	   	  

	  

	  

2008	  

2008	  

2008	  

7th	  National	  Annual	  Conference	  –	  Autism,	  a	  Hands	  On	  Approach,	  The	  University	  of	  Manchester	  	   and	  Stockport	  Postgraduate	  Medical	  Education	  Centre,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Grand	  challenges	   in	  science	  and	  clinical	  care	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Stockport,	  UK,	  November	  10,	  2010.	  	   Forty-­‐Eighth	  Annual	  New	  Horizons	  in	  Science,	  Council	  for	  the	  Advancement	  of	  Science	  Writing:	   “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	  outcome	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism”.	  	Y   ale	  	  	   	   University,	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  November	  9,	  2010.	  	   IX	  International	  Congress,	  Autism-­‐Europe,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	   outcome	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism”.	  Catania,	  Italy,	  October	  9,	  2010.	  	   Simons	  Foundation	  Autism	  Research	  Initiative:	  “Early	  indicators	  and	  predictors	  of	  outcome	  in	   infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism”.	  Washington,	  D.C.,	  September	  13,	  2010.	   Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine	  Department	  of	  Genetics,	  Grand	  Rounds:	  Sociality	  in	  the	  first	  two	  years	  	   of	  life:	  “Cognitive	  science	  frontiers	  in	  research	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  	   May	  5,	  2010.	   Interdisciplinary	  Center	  on	  Bioethics,	  Disability	  Interest	  Group,	  Yale	  University:	  “Bioethical	  	   issues	  related	  to	  research	  on	  early	  detection	  of	  autism”.	  	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  March	  30,	  2010.	   56th	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  Annual	  Meeting:	  “Autism	  	   as	  a	  neurodevelopmental	  disorder	  of	  social	  engagement:	  new	  research	  and	  implications	  for	  	   assessment”.	  Hawaii,	  October	  29-­‐30,	  2009.	   8th	  Annual	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR):	  “Perception	  of	  audiovisual	   synchrony	  under	  varying	  degrees	  of	  social	  context	  in	  infants	  with	  autism”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  May	  9,	   2009.	   8th	  Annual	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR):	  “Perception	  of	  physical	  and	   social	  contingencies	  in	  infants	  with	  autism”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  May	  8,	  2009.	   8th	  Annual	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR:	  “Altered	  face	  scanning	  and	   impaired	  recognition	  of	  biological	  motion	  in	  2-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  May	  7,	  2009.	   Inaugural	  Lecture,	  Autism	  Science	  Foundation.	  “Autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  in	  the	  second	  year	  	   of	  life:	  Research	  and	  challenges”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  May	  12,	  2009.	   3rd	  Annual	  Conference,	  Mind	  &	  Body	  in	  Autism,	  Teachers	  College,	  Columbia	  University:	  	  “Social	  	   engagement	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  April	  	   18,	  2009.	   Invited	  Discussion	  of	  Symposium	  on	  Neural	  Systems,	  Cognition	  and	  Behavior,	  Simons	  	   	   Foundation,	  SFARI	  Annual	  Meeting,	  New	  Orleans,	  April	  2,	  2009.	   II	  Congreso	  Internacional	  Síndrome	  de	  Asperger,	  Keynote	  Address:	  	  “Quo	  Vadis	  Asperger	   Syndrome:	  Clinical	  Realities	  and	  Future	  Research”.	  	  Sevilla,	  Spain,	  February	  20,	  2009.	   II	  Congreso	  Internacional	  Síndrome	  de	  Asperger,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Where	  it	  all	  	   begins:	  Studies	  of	  social	  engagement	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers”.	  Sevilla,	  Spain,	  February	  19,	  2009.	   Connecticut	  Academy	  of	  Arts	  and	  Sciences,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “The	  emergence	  of	  social	   mind,	  social	  brain,	  and	  autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  November	  14,	  2008.	   Le	  Centre	  de	  Formacion	  et	  de	  Recherche	  Abe	  Bold	  Miriam	  Foundation,	  Colloque	  2008,	  Keynote	   Address:	  “Recherches	  récentes	  sur	  les	  nourrissons	  et	  les	  tout-­‐petits	  souffrant	  de	  troubles	   envahissants	  de	  developpement”.	  Montreal,	  Canada,	  October	  31,	  2008.	   The	  Organization	  for	  Autism	  Research,	  The	  Sixth	  Annual	  Applied	  Autism	  Research	  and	   Intervention	  Conference,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Social	  engagement	  in	  the	  first	  two	  years	  of	  life	  in	   autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Arlington,	  VA,	  October	  24,	  2008.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 55 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	8  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2008	  

2008	  

2008	  

2008	  

2008:	   	  

	  

	  

2008:	  

2008:	  

2008:	  

2007:	  

2007:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

2007:	  

2007:	  

2007:	  

2007:	   2007:	   2007:	  

Grand	  Rounds,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics,	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine:	  The	  first	  two	  years	   of	  life	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  new	  science	  and	  new	  goals”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	   October	  22,	  2008.	   35th	  Carnegie	  Symposium	  on	  Cognition:	  Development	  and	  Brain	  Systems	  in	  Autism.	  Carnegie	   Mellon	  University,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Studies	  of	  social	  engagement	  in	  the	  first	  two	  years	  of	   life	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Pittsburgh,	  PA,	  October	  18,	  2008.	   Simons	  Foundation	  Invited	  Workshop,	  How	  can	  cognitive	  science	  inform	  investigations	  of	  the	   cognitive	  phenotype	  in	  autism?	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “In	  search	  of	  a	  biologically	  relevant	   phenotype	  in	  autism”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  September	  6-­‐7,	  2008.	   Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine	  Reunion	  Weekend,	  Yale	  School	  of	  Medicine:	  Invited	  Scientific	   Presentation:	  “Identifying	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  year	  of	  life”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  June	  7,	  2008.	   7th	  Annual	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR:	  “Perception	  of	  physical	  	   	   and	  social	  contingencies	  in	  infants	  with	  autism”.	  London,	  May	  16,	  2008.	   7th	  Annual	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR):	  “Altered	  face	  scanning	  and	   impaired	  recognition	  of	  biological	  motion	  in	  2-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism”.	  London,	  May	  16,	  2008.	   STAART	  Annual	  Meeting,	  National	  Institutes	  of	  Health:	  “The	  Yale	  STAART:	  	A   ccomplishments	   2003	  –	  2007”.	  Bethesda,	  MD,	  April	  24,	  2008.	   15th	  Annual	  Centers	  for	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Disabilities	  (CARDs)	  of	  Florida:	  Keynote	  Address:	   “Looking	  at	  and	  thinking	  about	  people:	  Studies	  of	  social	  engagement	  in	  the	  first	  2	  years	  of	  life	  in	   Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders”.	  Orlando,	  FL,	  January	  27,	  2008.	   STEP	  Science	  for	  All	  series:	  Autism:	  What	  do	  we	  know	  now?	  National	  Institutes	  of	  Health:	   Invited	  Presentation:	  	  “Autism:	  science	  and	  clinical	  practice”.	  Bethesda,	  MD	  December	  11,	   2007.	   Scientific	  address	  upon	  receipt	  of	  Pearl	  H.	  Rieger	  Award,	  Rush	  NeuroBehavioral	  Center,	  Rush	  	   Medical	  Center:	  “Identifying	  children	  with	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  2	  years	  of	  life”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  	  	   October	  18,	  2007.	   19th	  Annual	  New	  York	  Mental	  Health	  Symposium,	  NARSAD,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  ”A	  potential	   method	  of	  screening	  for	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  months	  of	  life”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  October	  19th,	   2007.	   The	  8th	  International	  Congress	  Autism	  –	  Keynote	  Address:	  ”Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	   engagement	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  the	  formation	  of	  the	  social	  mind	  and	  social	  brain”.	   Europe,	  Oslo,	  Norway,	  September	  1,	  2007.	   International	  Congress	  for	  Autism	  Research:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	   social	  engagement	  in	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  from	  babyhood	  to	   adulthood”.	  Mexico	  City,	  July	  5,	  2007.	   Cold	  Spring	  Harbor	  Laboratory	  workshop	  for	  basic	  scientists.	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Autism	   Spectrum	  Disorders:	  Clinical	  Science”.	  Cold	  Spring	  Harbor,	  NY,	  June	  14,	  2007.	   6th	  Annual	  Meeting,	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (IMFAR:	  “The	  social	   neuroscience	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Seattle,	  WA,	  May	  3,	  2007.	   39th	  Annual	  Meeting,	  International	  Society	  for	  Developmental	  Psychobiology,	  and	  Society	  for	   Neuroscience:	  Sackler	  Symposium,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	   engagement	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  October	  14,	   2007.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 56 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  3	  	  	9  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	   2006:	  
2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2005:	   2004:	   2004:	  

Congresso	  Internacional	  de	  Sindrome	  de	  Asperger,	  Autism	  Europe	  and	  Associação	  Portuguesa	   de	  Síndrome	  de	  Asperger,	  Keynote	  Address:	  	  “Research	  on	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Where	  are	   we?”.Oporto,	  Portugal	  September	  25,	  2006.	   Society	  of	  Biological	  Psychiatry,	  61st	  Annual	  Scientific	  Convention	  &	  Program,	  Invited	   Presentation:	  “The	  social	  neuroscience	  of	  autism”.	  Toronto,	  Ontario,	  May	  20,	  2006.	   Mayo	  Clinic	  College	  of	  Medicine,	  Dana	  Child	  Development	  and	  Learning	  Disorders	  Program:	  	   “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features,	  assessment	  and	  intervention	  guidelines,	  and	  highlights	   of	  current	  research”.	  Rochester,	  MN,	  April	  28,	  2006.	  	  	   2006	  Cognitive	  Science	  Society	  Annual	  Meeting:	  “Swimming	  in	  the	  underlying	  stream:	   computational	  models	  of	  gaze	  in	  a	  comparative	  behavioral	  analysis	  of	  autism”.	  Vancouver,	   Canada,	  July	  26,	  2006.	   Brain	  Development	  and	  Disorders	  Project,	  Colloquium	  Series,	  Department	  of	  Brain	  and	   Cognitive	  Sciences,	  Massachusetts	  Institute	  of	  Technology:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  	  “Looking	  at	   and	  thinking	  about	  people	  in	  individuals	  with	  autism	  through	  the	  lifespan:	  Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	   of	  social	  visual	  pursuit”.	  Cambridge,	  MA,	  April	  19,	  2006.	   Mind,	  Brain,	  Culture,	  and	  Consciousness,	  Whitney	  Humanities	  Center	  at	  Yale	  University:	  Invited	   Presentation:	  	  “Social	  minds:	  Perspectives	  from	  eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  with	  individuals	  with	   autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  December	  13,	  2005.	   Annual	  Scientific	  Meeting	  of	  the	  NIH	  Networks	  for	  Autism	  Research	  (CPEA	  and	  STAART):	  “Eye-­‐ tracking	  studies	  of	  looking	  at	  and	  thinking	  about	  people	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism:	  Watching	  a	   face	  but	  not	  seeing	  a	  person?”	  Bethesda,	  MD,	  November	  8,	  2005.	   Montreal	  Children’s	  Hospital,	  McGill	  University:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	   visual	  social	  engagement	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  from	  toddlerhood	  to	  adulthood”.	   Montreal,	  Quebec,	  Canada,	  August	  26,	  2005.	   Distinguished	  Lecture	  Series,	  UC	  Davis	  M.I.N.D.	  Institute:	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  visual	   pursuit	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Sacramento,	  CA,	  June	  8,	  2005.	   UCLA	  –	  Autism	  Affinity	  Group	  Lecture	  Series,	  Departments	  of	  Neurology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  UCLA:	   Invited	  Presentation:	  “Looking	  and	  thinking	  about	  people:	  recent	  social	  cognitive	  research	  in	   autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Los	  Angeles,	  CA,	  June	  3,	  2005.	   NICHD	  and	  NAAR	  High	  Risk	  Baby	  Sibs	  Research	  Consortium	  2005	  Annual	  Meeting:	   “Quantification	  of	  social	  visual	  pursuit	  when	  viewing	  naturalistic	  situations	  using	  eye-­‐tracking	   technology”.	  Rockville,	  MD,	  March	  30,	  2005.	   Autism	  Think	  Tank:	  The	  Neural	  Basis	  of	  Autism.	  Columbia	  University	  and	  the	  Simons	   Foundation:	  “Imaging	  the	  world	  through	  the	  eyes	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism:	  eye-­‐tracking	   studies	  of	  visual	  social	  engagement”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  February	  26,	  2005.	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Department	  of	  Neuroscience	  and	  Department	  of	  Psychiatry,	  University	  of	   Florida:	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  engagement	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  disorders”.	   Gainesville,	  FL,	  January	  21,	  2005.	   Dr.	  Harry	  A.	  Waisman	  Memorial	  Lecture,	  Waisman	  Institute,	  University	  of	  Wisconsin:	  “Eye-­‐ tracking	  studies	  of	  visual	  engagement	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders”.	  Madison,	  WI,	  November	   19,	  2004.	   25th	  Annual	  TEACCH	  Conference.	  The	  Department	  of	  Psychiatry,	  The	  University	  of	  North	   Carolina	  at	  Chapel	  Hill,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  	  “Understanding	  circumscribed	  interests	  in	  autism	   spectrum	  disorders”.	  Chapel	  Hill,	  NC,	  May	  27,	  2004.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 57 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2004:	   2004:	   2004:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2003:	   2002:	   2002:	   2002:	  
2001:	   2001:	   2001:	   2001:	   2000:	   2000:	  
2000:	  

Herbert	  G.	  Birch	  Services	  Seventh	  Annual	  New	  York	  City	  Area	  Conference:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  	   “Behavioral	  and	  neuroimaging	  studies	  of	  social	  cognition	  in	  autism:	  Implications	  to	  clinical	   practice	  and	  educational	  strategies”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  March	  10,	  2004.	   Clinical	  Luncheon	  at	  the	  Yale	  University	  Department	  of	  Psychology:	  “From	  looking	  at	  to	  thinking	   about	  people:	  lessons	  from	  autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  February	  19,	  2004.	   Yale	  University	  PACE	  Center	  grand	  rounds:	  “Social	  cognitive	  studies	  in	  autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	   February	  2,	  2004.	   Developmental	  Science	  and	  Psychoanalysis:	  Integration	  and	  Innovation.	  The	  Yale	  Child	  Study	   Center	  and	  the	  Anna	  Freud	  Centre:	  “Social	  cognition	  as	  embodied	  traces	  of	  social	  inter-­‐action:	   lessons	  from	  autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  December	  12,	  2003.	   Seventh	  International	  Autism	  Europe	  Congress,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Behavioral	  and	   neuroimaging	  studies	  of	  social	  cognition	  in	  autism”.	  Lisbon,	  Portugal,	  November	  15,	  2003.	   American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  50th	  Anniversary	  Meeting:	  “Research	  on	   social	  behavior	  in	  infants	  with	  autism”.	  Miami,	  FL,	  October	  17,	  2003.	   The	  US	  Congressional	  Biomedical	  Research	  Caucus.	  Capitol	  Hill:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Progress	   in	  Autism	  Research”.	  Washington,	  D.C.,	  September	  10,	  2003.	   Developmental	  Luncheon	  (Grand	  Rounds)	  at	  the	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Yale	  University:	   “The	  social	  mind	  and	  the	  social	  brain:	  lessons	  from	  autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  October	  23,	  2002.	   Università	  Degli	  Studi	  Di	  Modena	  e	  Regio	  Emilia,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Nuovi	  strumenti	  di	   ricerca	  e	  di	  intervento	  nell’Autismo	  e	  nei	  Disturbi	  Pervasivi	  dello	  Sviluppo“.	  Modena,	  Italy,	  May	   27,	  2002.	  	  	   Autismo	  Italia	  and	  Autisme	  Europe,	  Conferenza	  Internazionale	  in	  memoria	  di	  Donald	  Cohen,	  Un	   Patto	  Per	  L’Autismo	  Fra	  Istituzioni,	  Comunita	  Scientifica	  e	  Famiglie.	  La	  Sapienza	  University,	   Invited	  Presentation:	  “Lo	  sguardo	  e	  il	  pensiero	  dell’autismo	  sugli	  altri.	  Aspetti	  Neurobiologici	   Dell’Autismo”.	  Rome,	  Italy,	  May	  24,	  2002.	   Third	  Annual	  Issues	  in	  Autism	  Conference,	  The	  social	  brain.	  University	  of	  Miami,	  Center	  for	   Autism	  and	  Related	  Disabilities,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “The	  Yale	  eye	  tracking	  studies	  in	  autism”.	   Miami,	  FL,	  March	  31,	  2001.	   National	  Institutes	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development,	  Collaborative	  Projects	  of	   Excellence	  in	  Autism:	  “Eye-­‐tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  visual	  pursuit	  in	  autism:	  viewing	  naturalistic	   situations”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  May	  2,	  2001.	   5th	  Annual	  Conference	  on	  Autism.	  Mount	  Sinai	  School	  of	  Medicine:	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Eye-­‐ tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  cognition	  in	  autism”.	  New	  York	  City,	  NY,	  April	  22,	  2001.	   National	  Alliance	  for	  Research	  Annual	  Meeting,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Studies	  of	  the	  social	  mind	   and	  the	  social	  brain:	  Implications	  for	  treatment	  and	  intervention”.	  Ft.	  Lauderdale,	  FL,	  February	   3,	  2001.	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Bradley	  Hospital	  and	  Brown	  School	  of	  Medicine:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	   and	  research	  issues”.	  Providence,	  RI,	  November	  15,	  2000.	   John	  D.	  and	  Catherine	  T.	  MacArthur	  Foundation	  and	  James	  S.	  McDonnell	  Foundation,	  Research	   Network	  on	  Early	  Experience	  and	  Brain	  Development:	  Meeting	  on	  Face	  Recognition,	  Invited	   Presentation:	  “Eye	  tracking	  studies	  of	  social	  visual	  pursuit	  in	  autism”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  November	   11-­‐12,	  2000.	   6th	  Annual	  Current	  Trends	  in	  Autism	  Conference,	  The	  Autism	  Research	  Foundation	  and	   Massachusetts	  General	  Hospital	  for	  Children,	  Invited	  Presentation:	  “Seeing	  people	  and	  thinking	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 58 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

2000:	   2000:	  

1999:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	  	   	  

	  

	  

1999:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1999:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	  	   	  

	  

	  

1998:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

about	  people:	  Eye	  tracking	  studies	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Danvers,	  MA,	  October	  21,	   2000.	   National	  Institutes	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development,	  Collaborative	  Projects	  of	   Excellence	  in	  Autism:	  “Looking	  at	  people:	  Eye	  tracking	  studies	  in	  autism”.	  Denver,	  CO,	   September	  25,	  2000.	   Congresso	  Internazionale,	  L’autismo	  e	  i	  disturbi	  pervasivi	  dello	  sviluppo:	  nuove	  conoscenze	  per	   nuovi	  interventi.	  Fondazione	  per	  lo	  Studio	  e	  la	  Ricerca	  Sull’	  Infanzia	  e	  L’Adolescenza,	  Invited	   Presentation:	  “The	  development	  of	  social	  competence:	  Precursors	  and	  neurobiological	   underpinnings”.	  Bologna,	  Italy,	  March	  20,	  2000.	   National	  Institute	  of	  Child	  Health	  and	  Human	  Development	  (NICHD),	  Network	  on	  the	  	   	   Neurobiology	  and	  Genetics	  of	  Autism:	  Collaborative	  Programs	  of	  Excellence	  in	  Autism:	  “A	  	   paradigm	  for	  assessing	  social	  cognition:	  the	  Social	  Attribution	  Task”.	  Washington,	  D.C.,	  	   	   September	  29,	  1999.	  	   NIDCD	  Symposium	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Language	  Disorders:	  “Linguistic	  characteristics	  of	  	   individuals	  with	  higher	  functioning	  autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Madison,	  WI,	  June	  8,	  1999.	  	   Biennial	  Meeting	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Understanding	  the	  broader	   phenotype	  of	  autism:	  Behavioral	  profiles	  of	  immediate	  relatives	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  	   Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Albuquerque,	  NM,	  April	  16,	  1999.	  	   Biennial	  Meeting	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Discussant	  for	  Drs.	  Lisa	  	   Capps	  and	  Marian	  Sigman’s	  symposium	  on	  Social-­‐Emotional	  and	  Language	  Abilities	  in	  	   	   Nonretarded	  Children	  with	  Autism:	  Etiologic	  and	  Interpersonal	  Implications”.	  Albuquerque,	  	   NM,	  April	  16,	  1999.	  	   Yale	  University	  Child	  Study	  Center	  Conference	  on	  Autism,	  Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  related	  	   conditions:	  “Neuropsychology	  and	  social	  cognition	  in	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  Update	  on	  current	  	   research”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  March	  12,	  1999.	   Grand	  Rounds,	  Haskins	  Laboratories:	  “Speech,	  language	  and	  communication	  disabilities	  in	  	   autism”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  October	  8,	  1998.	  	   Center	  for	  Autism	  and	  Related	  Disorders,	  Kennedy-­‐Krieger	  Institute,	  Johns	  Hopkins	  School	  of	  	   Medicine:	  “Social	  cognition	  in	  autism:	  Behavioral	  and	  neuroimaging	  research.	  Clinical	  and	  	   Research	  Applications	  of	  Research	  on	  Social	  Cognition”.	  Baltimore,	  MD,	  September	  19,	  1998.	   Second	  Annual	  Learning	  Disorders	  Symposium,	  The	  H.E.L.P.	  Group	  -­‐	  U.C.L.A.	  Neuropsychology	  	   Program:	  “Asperger’s	  Syndrome:	  Treatment	  and	  Intervention”.	  Los	  Angeles,	  CA,	  September	  	   18,	  1998.	  	   Second	  Annual	  Learning	  Disorders	  Symposium,	  The	  H.E.L.P.	  Group	  -­‐	  U.C.L.A.	  Neuropsychology	  	   Program:	  “Nonverbal	  Learning	  Disabilities	  and	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome:	  Experimental	  	   	   approaches”.	   Los	  Angeles,	  CA,	  September	  18,	  1998.	  	   American	  Psychological	  Association	  106th	  Annual	  Convention:	  “NLD	  impact	  on	  socialization:	  	   Developmental	  and	  experimental	  perspectives”.	  San	  Francisco,	  CA,	  August	  14,	  1998.	   American	  Psychological	  Association	  106th	  Annual	  Convention:	  “NLD	  and	  Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  	   Issues	  for	  future	  research”.	  San	  Francisco,	  CA,	  August	  14,	  1998.	   International	  Neuropsychological	  Society:	  “NLD	  and	  Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Further	  evidence	  of	  	   association”.	  Budapest,	  Hungary,	  July	  6,	  1998.	  	   The	  Spectrum	  of	  Developmental	  Disabilities	  XX.	  Johns	  Hopkins	  University:	  “Asperger’s	  	   	   syndrome:	  Clinical	  and	  social	  cognitive	  aspects”.	  Baltimore,	  MD,	  March	  31,	  1998.	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 59 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1998:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

1997:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

1996	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

L’Autismo	  ed	  i	  Disturbi	  Pervasivi	  dello	  Sviluppo	  in	  età	  evolutiva:	  Incontro	  tra	  Famiglie,	  Servizi	  e	  	  

Istituzioni:	  “Clinical	  aspects,	  social	  cognitive	  research,	  and	  intervention	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  	  

conditions”.	  Modena,	  Italy,	  March	  28,	  1998.	  	  

Modena	  International	  Conference	  on	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders:	  	   	  

“Asperger’s	  syndrome	  and	  other	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders”.	  Modena,	  Italy,	  March	  26,	  

1998.	  	  

International	  Association	  for	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  and	  Allied	  Professions	  (IACAPAP),	  	  

International	  Conference	  on	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders:	  	   	  

	  

“Neuropsychological	  and	  social	  cognitive	  approaches	  to	  research	  on	  the	  Pervasive	  	   	  

Developmental	  Disorders”.	  Venice,	  Italy,	  March	  23,	  1998.	  

International	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry	  and	  Allied	  Professions	  (IACAPAP),	  	  

International	  Conference	  on	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders:	  “Asperger’s	  	  

syndrome”.	  Venice,	  Italy,	  March	  23,	  1998.	  

Autism:	  Emerging	  issues	  in	  prevalence	  and	  etiology,	  Center	  for	  Disease	  Control	  and	  Prevention:	  	  

“Operational	  definition	  of	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions	  for	  surveillance	  and	  epidemiologic	  	  

purposes”.	  Atlanta,	  GA,	  November	  6,	  1997.	  	   44th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger’s	  	  

disorder:	  The	  utility	  of	  broad	  vs.	  narrow	  definitions”.	  Toronto,	  Ontario,	  Canada,	  October	  17,	  	  

1997.	   44th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  	   	  

“Neuropsychological	  and	  social	  cognitive	  mechanisms	  contributing	  to	  the	  social	  disability	  in	  	  

individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Toronto,	  Ontario,	  Canada,	  October	  16,	  1997.	   44th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger’s	  	  

syndrome:	  Diagnosis	  and	  phenomenology”.	  Toronto,	  Ontario,	  Canada,	  October	  16,	  1997.	  

Grand	  rounds,	  Institute	  of	  Living:	  “Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features	  and	  current	  research”.	  

Hartford,	  CT,	  September	  10,	  1997.	   34th	  Annual	  International	  Conference	  of	  the	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America,	  	  

Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Clinical	  features	  and	  neurobiology”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  	  	  

February	  20,	  1997.	  	  

Grand	  Rounds,	  Department	  of	  Pediatrics	  Yale	  University	  School	  of	  Medicine	  and	  Yale	  -­‐	  New	  	  

Haven	  Hospital:	  “Asperger’s	  Syndrome”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  December	  11,	  1996.	   8th	  Annual	  International	  Conference	  of	  CH.A.D.D.,	  Children	  and	  Adults	  with	  Attention	  Deficit	  	  

Disorders,	  Keynote	  Address:	  “Severe	  disorders	  of	  socialization:	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome	  and	  other	  	  

Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders”.	  Chicago,	  IL,	  November	  14,	  1996.	  

43rd	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Stoppage	  	  

rules	  in	  the	  PDDs	  revisited”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  October	  25,	  1996.	  	  

43rd	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger’s	  

syndrome:	  diagnosis,	  neuropsychology,	  neuroimaging,	  and	  genetic	  aspects”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  	  

October	  25,	  1996.	  	  

43rd	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  	   	  

“Symposium	  on	  diagnostic	  issues	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions”.	  Philadelphia,	  PA,	  October	  	  

24,	  1996.	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 60 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1996:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1995:	   	  

	  

	  

1995:	   	  

	  

	  

1994:	   	  

	  

	  

1994:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1994:	   	  

	  

	  

1994:	   	  

	  

	  

1994:	   	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

1993:	   	  

	  

	  

19th	  Annual	  Mid-­‐Year	  Meeting	  of	  the	  International	  Neuropsychological	  Society:	  “A	  	   	  
developmental	  psychopathological	  model	  of	  Asperger	  Syndrome”.	  Veldhoven,	  The	  Netherlands,	  
June	  10,	  1996.	   16th	  Annual	  Spring	  Meeting,	  Division	  of	  Psychoanalysis	  (39),	  American	  Psychological	  	   	  
Association:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  The	  inner	  world	  experiences	  of	  an	  individual	  with	  a	  	   	  
neuropsychologically-­‐	 b  ased	  social	  disability”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  April	  16,	  1996.	   33rd	  Annual	  International	  Conference	  of	  the	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America,	  	  
Keynote	  Address:	  “Asperger	  syndrome:	  Toward	  an	  understanding	  of	  the	  condition	  and	  	   	  
improvement	  of	  service	  provision”.	  Dallas,	  TX,	  March	  4,	  1996.	  	   42nd	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger	  Syndrome:	  	  
Nosology,	  Neuropsychology	  and	  Current	  Research”.	  New	  Orleans,	  LA,	  October	  19,	  1995.	  
International	  Conference	  of	  the	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America,	  Keynote	  Address:	  	  
“Asperger	  syndrome”.	  Orlando,	  FL,	  March	  23,	  1995.	  	  
Annual	  Conference	  of	  Brazilian	  Association	  of	  Child	  Neurology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  Keynote	  Address:	  
“Autism	  and	  related	  disorders”.	  São	  Paulo,	  Brazil,	  December	  15,	  1994.	   41st	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Childhood	  	  
Disintegrative	  Disorder:	  Differences	  from	  "Early"	  and	  "Late"	  onset	  autism”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  
October	  17,	  1994.	   41st	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger	  	  
syndrome:	  Clinical	  and	  research	  issues”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  October	  17,	  1994.	   41st	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  	   	  
“Neuropsychological	  issues	  in	  Asperger	  syndrome”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  October	  16,	  1994.	  	   41st	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Eligibility	  	  
for	  Birth-­‐to-­‐Three	  services	  in	  a	  sample	  of	  inner-­‐city	  children”.	  New	  York,	  NY,	  October	  15,	  1994.	  
Grand	  Rounds,	  Department	  of	  Psychology,	  Yale	  University,	  New	  Haven:	  “The	  emergence	  of	  a	  	  
new	  syndrome:	  Asperger	  syndrome”.	  New	  Haven,	  CT,	  October	  30,	  1993.	   40th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger	  	  
syndrome:	  Diagnosis,	  neuropsychological	  aspects,	  and	  interventions”.	  San	  Antonio,	  TX,	   	  
October	  23,	  1993.	   40th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  Workshop	  	  
on	  childhood	  schizophrenia.	  San	  Antonio,	  TX,	  October	  22,	  1993.	   40th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “DSM-­‐IV	  	  
Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  disorders	  Field	  Trial”.	  San	  Antonio,	  TX,	  October	  22,	  1993.	   40th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Diagnosis	  	  
and	  Assessment	  of	  Autism	  and	  PDDs”.	  San	  Antonio,	  TX,	  October	  21,	  1993.	  
International	  Neuropsychological	  Society	  Twenty-­‐First	  Annual	  Meeting:	  “Higher	  functioning	  	  
autism,	  Asperger	  syndrome,	  and	  Nonverbal	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Syndrome”.	  Galveston,	  TX,	  
February	  18,	  1993.	  
Eight	  Biennial	  National	  Training	  Institute,	  Zero	  to	  Three	  National	  Center	  for	  Clinical	  Infant	  	  
Programs:	  “Challenges	  to	  Researching	  and	  Serving	  Children	  in	  Culturally	  Diverse,	  High-­‐Risk	  	  
Families”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  December	  14,	  1993.	  
1993	  Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Autistic	  social	  	  
dysfunction:	  Primary	  and	  pervasive”.	  New	  Orleans,	  LA,	  April	  21,	  1993.	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 61 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

1993:	   	  

1993	  Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Higher	  functioning	  

	  

	  

autism,	  Asperger's	  syndrome,	  and	  Nonverbal	  Learning	  Disabilities	  syndrome”.	  New	  Orleans,	  

	  

	  

LA,	  April	  21,	  1993.	  

1993:	   	  

1993	  Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Discussant	  for	  Dr.	  	  

	  

	  

Marian	  Sigman	  et	  al.'s	  Symposium	  on	  Adaptive	  Behavior,	  Theory	  of	  Mind,	  and	  Emotional	  	  

	  

	  

Understanding	  in	  Autism”.	  New	  Orleans,	  LA,	  April	  20,	  1993.	  

1993:	   	  

National	  Center	  for	  Clinical	  Infant	  Programs:	  “The	  ‘Who's	  Who’	  of	  inner-­‐city	  toddlers:	  Setting	  up	  

	  

	  

1992:	   	  

a	  home-­‐based	  early	  intervention	  program”.	  Seattle,	  WA,	  March	  2,	  1993.	   39th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Asperger's	  	  

	  

	  

syndrome,	  Autism,	  and	  Nonverbal	  Learning	  Disabilities:	  Convergence	  and	  	d   ivergence”.	  	   	  

	  

	  

1992:	   	  

Washington	  D.C.,	  October	  20,	  1992.	   39th	  Annual	  Meeting	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  “Assessment	  

	  

	  

of	  young	  children	  with	  Autism/PDD”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  October	  19,	  1992.	  

1992:	   	  

Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America	  International	  Conference:	  “Discussant	  for	  Dr.	  	  

	  

	  

Isabelle	  Rapin’s	  symposium	  on	  Preschool	  Developmental	  Disabilities:	  Diagnosis	  and	  Outcome”.	  	  

	  

	  

1991:	   	  

Atlanta,	  GA,	  March	  27,	  1992.	   7th	  Biennial	  National	  Training	  Institute	  of	  the	  National	  Center	  for	  Clinical	  Infant	  Programs:	  

	  

	  

“Contributions	  of	  social	  context	  to	  the	  young	  child's	  reactions	  to	  incongruity:	  The	  emergent	  	  

	  

	  

appreciation	  of	  metaphor	  and	  irony”.	  Washington	  D.C.,	  December	  9,	  1991.	  

1991:	   	  

1991	  Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  pre-­‐Conference	  	  

	  

	  

symposium	  on	  “Theory	  of	  Mind	  in	  Autism	  Social	  development	  in	  autism:	  Historical	  and	  clinical	  	  

	  

	  

perspectives”.	  Seattle,	  WA,	  April	  14,	  1991.	  

1991:	   	  

1991	  Biennial	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  pre-­‐Conference	  	  

	  

	  

symposium	  on	  “Theory	  of	  Mind	  Experiencing	  self	  and	  others	  in	  Autism:	  A	  psychoanalytic	  	  

	  

	  

perspective	  on	  Theory	  of	  Mind	  and	  Autism”.	  Seattle,	  WA,	  April	  14,	  1991.	  

1991:	   	  

1991	  Biennial	  	  Conference	  of	  the	  Society	  for	  Research	  in	  Child	  Development:	  “Autistic	  social	  	  

	  

	  

dysfunction:	  Some	  limitations	  of	  the	  Theory	  of	  Mind	  Hypothesis”.	  Seattle,	  WA,	  April	  16,	  1991.	  

1990:	   	  

National	  Autistic	  Society	  meeting	  on	  "Experimental	  Psychology	  and	  the	  Autistic	  Syndromes"	  	  

	  

	  

Durham,	  University:	  “Young	  autistic	  children's	  listening	  preferences	  in	  regard	  to	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

speech.	  Durham,	  England,	  October	  16,	  1990.	  

	  

27a.	   Posters	  and	  Abstracts	  in	  International	  Meetings:	  

	  

There	  have	  been	  numerous	  posters	  and	  abstracts	  presented	  and/or	  published	  as	  abstracts	  in	  

international	  meetings	  over	  the	  years.	  For	  example,	  in	  the	  last	  International	  Meeting	  for	  Autism	  

Research	  (IMFAR)	  (San	  Diego,	  CA,	  May	  17-­‐19,	  2011),	  there	  were	  5	  oral	  presentations	  (presenter	  

or	  co-­‐presenter)	  and	  8	  posters.	  	  

	  

28.	   Other	  activities:	  Media	  coverage:	  

	  

	  

	  

There	  have	  been	  numerous	  media	  appearances	  over	  the	  years,	  which	  included	  press	  coverage	  	  

	  

	  

of	  our	  scientific	  work,	  advocacy	  work	  and/or	  autism	  awareness	  work.	  The	  following	  is	  a	  select	  	  

	  

	  

sample:	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 62 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	5  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Nature	  Podcast:	  “A	  New	  Finding	  About	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

http://www.nature.com/nature/podcast/v458/n7238/nature-­‐2009-­‐04-­‐02.html	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Making	  the	  Paper”	  

	  

	  

Nature.	  2009,	  459,	  138.	  	  Highlighted	  research	  profile	  of	  Nature	  issue	  #	  459.	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Studio	  360,	  Public	  Radio	  International:	  “Windows	  to	  the	  Soul”	  

	  

	  

http://www.studio360.org/episodes/2008/03/28	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“This	  Emotional	  Life:	  Autism	  and	  Loneliness”,	  PBS	  

	  

	  

http://www.pbs.org/thisemotionallife/	  	  

	  

	  

Featured	  research	  in	  documentary	  on	  human	  emotions	  and	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome.	  

	  

	  

	  

“Ami	  Klin	  &	  Warren	  Jones:	  Melding	  art	  and	  science	  for	  autism	  research“	  

	  

	  

http://sfari.org/news/ami-­‐klin-­‐warren-­‐jones-­‐melding-­‐art-­‐and-­‐science-­‐for-­‐autism-­‐research	  	  

	  

	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  (6	  May	  2008)	  -­‐	  By	  Virginia	  Hughes.	  

	  

	  

	  

“New	  Techniques	  Promise	  Early	  Diagnosis	  for	  Autism”	  

	  

	  

http://sfari.org/news/new-­‐techniques-­‐promise-­‐early-­‐diagnosis-­‐for-­‐autism	  	  

	  

	  

The	  Simons	  Foundation	  (17	  April	  2008)	  -­‐	  By	  Alica	  Opar	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Mapping	  the	  Social	  Mind“-­‐	  Yale	  Medicine	  (Summer	  2004)	  -­‐	  By	  Peter	  Farley	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“In	  Focus:	  Yale	  Child	  Study	  Center”	  -­‐	  Yale	  Bulletin	  (04	  April	  2008)	  -­‐	  By	  Karen	  N.	  Peart	  

	  

	  

	  

“Lifting	  the	  Veils	  of	  Autism,	  One	  by	  One	  by	  One”	  –	  The	  New	  York	  Times,	  (24	  February	  2004)	  -­‐	  By	  

	  

	  

Erica	  Goode	  

	  

	  

	  

“Experiment	  Offers	  Look	  Through	  Eyes	  of	  Autism”	  –	  The	  New	  York	  Times	  (11	  June	  2002)	  -­‐	  By	  	  

	  

	  

John	  O’Neil	  

	  

	  

	  

“Inside	  Autism”	  -­‐	  Yale	  Alumni	  Magazine	  (November	  2002)	  -­‐	  By	  Bruce	  Fellman	  

	  

	  

	  

“Understanding	  Autism”	  -­‐	  Newsweek	  (31	  July	  2002)	  -­‐	  By	  Geoffrey	  Cowley	  

	  

	  

	  

“Asperger’s	  Syndrome”	  -­‐	  ABC	  -­‐	  Good	  Morning	  America	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Autism:	  Paying	  the	  Price“	  -­‐	  CNBC	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Autism“	  -­‐	  NYT	  -­‐	  Science	  Times	  	  

	  

	  

	  

“Autism:	  The	  Hidden	  Epidemic?”	  -­‐	  NBC	  Nightly	  News	  

	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 63 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	6  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

29.	   Bibliography	  (Over	  190	  Research	  Articles,	  Editorials,	  Reviews,	  Book	  Chapters,	  Special	  Journal	  Editions	  

	  

and	  Edited	  Books):	  

	  

	  

a.	  	   Published	  and	  in	  press	  research	  articles:	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (1991).	  Young	  autistic	  children's	  listening	  preferences	  in	  regard	  to	  speech:	  A	  possible	  	   	  

	  

	  

characterization	  of	  the	  symptom	  of	  social	  withdrawal.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders,	  21(1),	  29-­‐42.	  (Reprinted	  in	  Digest	  Neuropsych,	  1993,	  59,	  104)	  [PMID:	  1376327]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (1992).	  Listening	  preferences	  in	  regard	  to	  speech	  in	  four	  children	  with	  developmental	  	   	  

	  

	  

disabilities.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  33(4),	  763-­‐769.	  [PMID:	  1376327]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  (1992).	  Autistic	  social	  dysfunction:	  Some	  limitations	  of	  the	  theory	  	  

	  

	  

of	  mind	  hypothesis.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  33(5),	  861-­‐876.	  	   	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  1378847]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Siegel,	  B.,	  Szatmari,	  P.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Campbell,	  M.,	  Freeman,	  B.	  J.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  	  

	  

	  

Rutter,	  M.,	  &	  Kline,	  W.	  (1994).	  Field	  trial	  for	  autistic	  disorder	  in	  DSM-­‐IV.	  The	  American	  Journal	  	  

	  

	  

of	  Psychiatry,	  151(9),	  1361-­‐1367.	  (Reprinted	  in	  DSM-­‐IV	  Sourcebook,	  4,	  607-­‐626,	  Washington,	  	  

	  

	  

D.C.:	  American	  Psychiatric	  Association)	  [PMID:	  8067493]	  

	  

	  

Mayes,	  L.	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1994).	  The	  effect	  of	  humor	  on	  children's	  developing	  theory	  of	  	  

	  

	  

mind.	  British	  Journal	  of	  Developmental	  Psychology,	  12,	  555-­‐561.	  

	  

	  

Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Showalter,	  D.	  (1995).	  Diagnosing	  autism	  using	  ICD-­‐10	  criteria:	  	  

	  

	  

A	  comparison	  of	  Neural	  Networks	  and	  Standard	  Multivariate	  Procedures.	  The	  Journal	  of	  	 	   

	  

	  

Neuropsychiatry	  and	  Clinical	  Neurosciences,	  1(1),	  26-­‐37.	  

	  

	  

Mayes,	  L.	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Tercyak,	  K.	  P.,	  Jr.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1996).	  Test-­‐retest	  reliability	  for	  	  

	  

	  

false-­‐belief	  tasks.	  .	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(3),	  313-­‐319.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

8707914]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  &	  Rourke,	  B.	  P.	  (1995).	  Validity	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

neuropsychological	  characterization	  of	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  	  

	  

	  

and	  Psychiatry,	  36(7),	  1127-­‐1140.	  (Reprinted	  in	  R.	  Takagi.,	  M.	  Rutter,	  &	  E.	  Schopler,	  (Eds.),	  	  	  

	  

	  

Advances	  in	  Research	  	  on	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  1997,1:245-­‐258;	  Reprinted	  in	  	  

	  

	  

M.E.	  Hertzig,	  &	  E.A.	  Farber,	  (Eds.)	  Annual	  Progress	  in	  Child	  Psychiatry	  and	  Child	  Development.	  	  

	  

	  

1997,	  241-­‐259).	  New	  York:	  Brunner/Mazel)	  	  [PMID:	  8847376]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Pauls,	  D.	  (1998).	  Nosological	  and	  genetic	  aspects	  of	  Asperger’s	  syndrome.	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  28,	  456-­‐463.	  [PMID:	  9813781]	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 64 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	7  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Buitelaar,	  J.	  K.,	  van	  der	  Gaag,	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (1999).	  Exploring	  the	  boundaries	  of	  PDD:	  	  

	  

	  

Analysis	  of	  data	  from	  the	  DSM-­‐IV	  autistic	  disorder	  field	  trial.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  29(1),	  33-­‐43.	  [PMID:	  10097993]	  

	  

	  

Martin,	  A.,	  Scahill,	  L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1999).	  Higher-­‐functioning	  pervasive	  developmental	  	  

	  

	  

disorders:	  Rates	  and	  patterns	  of	  psychotropic	  drug	  use.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  38(7),	  923-­‐931.	  [PMID:	  10405512]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  de	  Bildt,	  A.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1999).	  A	  normed	  	  

	  

	  

study	  of	  face	  recognition	  in	  autism	  and	  related	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders,	  29(6),	  497-­‐507.	  [PMID:	  10638462]	  

	  

	  

Landau,	  E.	  C.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1999).	  Season	  of	  birth	  in	  autism:	  A	  fiction	  	  

	  

	  

revisited.	  	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  29(5),385-­‐393.	  [PMID:	  10587885]	  

	  

	  

Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  Gauthier,	  I.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Fulbright,	  R.,	  Anderson,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Skudlarski,	  P.,	  Lacadie,	  C.,	  	  

	  

	  

Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  &	  Gore,	  J.C.	  (2000).	  Abnormal	  ventral	  temporal	  cortical	  activity	  among	  individuals	  	  

	  

	  

with	  autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome	  during	  face	  discrimination.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  	  

	  

	  

57(4),	  331-­‐340.	  [PMID:	  10768694]	  

	  

	  

Grossman,	  J.	  B.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Carter,	  A.	  S.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2000).	  Verbal	  bias	  in	  recognition	  of	  facial	  	  

	  

	  

emotions	  in	  children	  with	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  41(3),	  369-­‐379.	  [PMID:	  10784084]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Lang,	  J.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2000).	  	  Interrater	  reliability	  of	  clinical	  diagnosis	  and	  	  

	  

	  

DSM-­‐IV	  criteria	  for	  autistic	  disorder:	  Results	  of	  the	  DSM-­‐IV	  autism	  field	  trial.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  	  

	  

	  

and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  30(2),	  163-­‐167.	  [PMID:	  10832781]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2000).	  Attributing	  social	  meaning	  to	  ambiguous	  visual	  stimuli	  in	  higher	  functioning	  autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Asperger	  syndrome:	  The	  Social	  Attribution	  Task.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  

	  

	  

41(7),	  831-­‐846.	  [PMID:	  11079426]	  

	  

	  

Arnold,	  L.	  E.,	  Aman,	  M.	  G.,	  Martin,	  A.,	  Collier-­‐Crespin,	  A.,	  Vitiello,	  B.,	  Tierney,	  E.,	  Asarnow,	  R.,	  Bell-­‐	  

	  

	  

Bradshaw,	  F.,	  Freeman,	  B.	  J.,	  Gates-­‐Ulanet,	  P.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  McCracken,	  J.	  T.,	  McDougle,	  C.	  J.,	  	  

	  

	  

McGough,	  J.	  J.,	  Posey,	  D.	  J.,	  Scahill,	  L.,	  Swiezy,	  N.	  B.,	  Ritz,	  L.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  	  (2000).	  	   	  

	  

	  

Assessment	  in	  multisite	  randomized	  	 c  linical	  trials	  of	  patients	  with	  autism	  disorder:	  The	  	   	  

	  

	  

autism	  RUPP	  Network.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  30(2),	  99-­‐111.	  	   	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  10832774]	  

	  

	  

Shriberg,	  L.	  D.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  McSweeny,	  J.	  L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2001).	  Speech	  and	  	  

	  

	  

prosody	  characteristics	  of	  adolescents	  and	  adults	  with	  high	  functioning	  autism	  and	  Asperger	  	  

	  

	  

syndrome.	  Journal	  of	  Speech,	  Language	  and	  Hearing	  Research,	  44,	  1097-­‐1115.	  [PMID:	  	   	  

	  

	  

11708530]	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 65 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	8  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  (2002).	  Visual	  fixation	  patterns	  during	  viewing	  	  

	  

	  

of	  naturalistic	  social	  situations	  as	  predictors	  of	  social	  competence	  in	  individuals	  with	  autism.	  	  

	  

	  

Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  59(9),	  809-­‐816.	  [PMID:	  12215080]	  

	  

	  

Grigorenko,	  E.	  L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Pauls,	  D.	  L.,	  Senft,	  R.,	  Hooper,	  C.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2002).	  A	  descriptive	  study	  of	  	  

	  

	  

hyperlexia	  in	  a	  clinically	  referred	  sample	  of	  children	  with	  developmental	  delays.	  	  Journal	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  32(1),	  3-­‐12.	  (Reprinted	  in	  Giornale	  Italiano	  delle	  Disabilità	  

	  

	  

(Italian	  Journal	  Disability	  Studies),	  VI(1),	  34-­‐49,	  2006)	  [PMID:	  11916330]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  (2002).	  Defining	  and	  quantifying	  the	  social	  	  

	  

	  

phenotype	  in	  autism.	  	  The	  American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  159(6),	  895-­‐908.	  (Reprinted	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Advances	  in	  R	  on	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  8,	  2004,	  212-­‐231)	  [PMID:	  12042174]	  

	  

	  

Tsatsanis,	  K.	  D.,	  Dartnall,	  N.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2003).	  Concurrent	  

	  

	  

validity	  and	  classification	  accuracy	  of	  the	  Leiter	  and	  Leiter-­‐R	  in	  low-­‐functioning	  children	  	   	  

	  

	  

with	  autism.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  33(1),	  23-­‐30.	  [PMID:	  12708577]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2003).	  The	  Enactive	  Mind	  –	  from	  actions	  to	  	   	  

	  

	  

cognition:	  Lessons	  from	  autism.	  Philosophical	  Transactions	  of	  the	  Royal	  Society,	  Biological	  	  

	  

	  

Sciences,	  358,	  345-­‐360.	  (Reprinted	  in	  U.	  Frith	  &	  E.	  L.	  Hill	  (Eds.)	  (2004),	  Autism:	  Mind	  and	  Brain,	  	  

	  

	  

127-­‐159.	  Oxford:	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  Reprinted	  in	  F.R.	  Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.J.	  	  

	  

	  

Cohen	  (Eds.)	  (2005),	  Handbook	  of	  autism	  and	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders,	  Vol.	  1	  (3rd	  	  

	  

	  

ed.),	  682-­‐703.	  Hoboken,	  NJ:	  Wiley)	  [PMID:	  12639332]	  

	  

	  

Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  Grelotti,	  D.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Kleinman,	  J.,	  van	  der	  Gaag,	  C.,	  Marois,	  R.,	  &	  Skudlarski,	  P.	  (2003).	  	  

	  

	  

The	  role	  of	  the	  fusiform	  face	  area	  in	  social	  cognition:	  Implications	  for	  the	  pathobiology	  of	  	  

	  

	  

autism.	  Philosophical	  Transactions	  of	  the	  Royal	  Society,	  Biological	  Sciences,	  358,	  415-­‐427.	  	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  12639338]	  

	  

	  

Tsatsanis,	  K.	  D.,	  Rourke,	  B.	  P.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.,	  &	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  (2003).	  Reduced	  	  

	  

	  

thalamic	  volume	  in	  high-­‐functioning	  individuals	  with	  autism.	  Biological	  Psychiatry,	  53(2),	  121-­‐	  

	  

	  

129.	  [PMID:	  12547467]	  	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2003).	  	  Automatic	  attention	  cueing	  through	  eye	  

	  	   	  

movement	  in	  2-­‐year-­‐old	  children	  with	  autism.	  Child	  Development,	  74(4),	  1108-­‐1122.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

12938707]	  

	  

	  

Morgan,	  T.	  M.,	  Fernandez,	  T.,	  Davis,	  N.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Morris,	  A.,	  Lifton,	  R.	  P.,	  &	  State,	  M.	  W.	  (2004).	  	   	  

	  

	  

Disruption	  of	  Contactin	  4	  (CNTN4)	  results	  in	  developmental	  delay	  and	  other	  features	  of	  3p	  	  

	  

	  

deletion	  syndrome.	  The	  American	  Journal	  of	  Human	  Genetics,	  74(6),	  1286-­‐93.	  [PMID:	  	   	  

	  

	  

15106122]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Miles,	  S.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.,	  Sparrow,	  S.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  Coflin,	  M.,	  &	  Booker,	  S.	  (2004).	  	  

	  

	  

Adaptive	  behavior	  in	  autism	  and	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorder	  –	  not	  otherwise	  specified:	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 66 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  4	  	  	9  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Microanalysis	  of	  scores	  on	  the	  Vineland	  Adaptive	  Behavior	  Scales.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  34(2),	  223-­‐228.	  [PMID:	  15162940]	  

	  

	  

Ozonoff,	  S.,	  Cook,	  I.,	  Coon,	  H.,	  Dawson,	  G.,	  Joseph,	  R.	  M.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  McMahon,	  W.	  M.,	  Minshew,	  N.,	  	  

	  

	  

Munson,	  J.	  A.,	  Pennington,	  B.	  F.,	  Rogers,	  S.	  J.,	  Spence,	  M.	  A.,	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  H.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  	  

	  

	  

&	  Wrathall,	  D.	  (2004).	  Performance	  on	  Cambridge	  Neuropsychological	  Test	  Automated	  Battery	  	  

	  

	  

subtests	  sensitive	  to	  frontal	  lobe	  function	  in	  people	  with	  autistic	  disorder:	  evidence	  from	  the	  	  

	  

	  

Collaborative	  Programs	  of	  Excellence	  in	  Autism	  Network.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders,	  34(2),	  139-­‐150.	  [PMID:	  15162933]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Rubin,	  E.,	  Morgan,	  T.,	  Wiesner,	  L.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2004).	  Autism	  in	  a	  	  

	  

	  

15-­‐month-­‐old	  child.	  The	  American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  161(11),	  1981-­‐1988.	  [PMID:	  15514396]	  

	  

	  

Koenig,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  (2004).	  Deficits	  in	  social	  attribution	  ability	  in	  Prader-­‐Willi	  syndrome.	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  34(5),	  573-­‐582.	  	  [PMID:	  15628610]	  

	  

	  

Grelotti,	  D.	  J.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Gauthier,	  I.,	  Skudlarski,	  P.,	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  Gore,	  J.	  C.,	  &	  Schultz,	  	  

	  

	  

R.	  T.	  (2005).	  fMRI	  activation	  of	  the	  fusiform	  gyrus	  and	  amygdala	  to	  cartoon	  characters	  but	  not	  	  

	  

	  

to	  faces	  in	  a	  boy	  with	  autism.	  Neuropsychologia,	  43(3),	  373-­‐385.	  [PMID:	  15707614]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Pauls,	  D.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Three	  diagnostic	  approaches	  to	  Asperger	  	  	  

	  

	  

syndrome:	  implications	  for	  research.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  	   	  

	  

	  

35(2),	  221-­‐234.	  [PMID:	  15909408]	  

	  

	  

Woodbury-­‐Smith,	  M.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  a	  comparison	  of	  clinical	  	  

	  

	  

diagnoses	  and	  those	  made	  according	  to	  the	  ICD-­‐10	  and	  DSM-­‐IV.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  35(2),	  235-­‐240.	  [PMID:	  15909409]	  

	  

	  

O’Shea,	  A.	  G.,	  Fein,	  D.	  A.,	  Cillessen,	  A.	  H.	  N.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  (2005).	  Source	  memory	  in	  children	  	  

	  

	  

with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Developmental	  Neuropsychology,	  27(3),	  337-­‐360.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

15843101]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Augustyn,	  A.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Perception	  and	  production	  of	  prosody	  by	  	  

	  

	  

speakers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  	  

	  

	  

35(2),	  205-­‐220.	  [PMID:	  15909407]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Shriberg,	  L.	  D.,	  McSweeny,	  M.	  S.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Relations	  	  

	  

	  

between	  prosodic	  performance	  and	  communication	  and	  socialization	  ratings	  in	  high	  functioning	  

	  

	  

speakers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  	  

	  

	  

35(2),	  205-­‐220.	  [PMID:	  16283080]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2006).	  Attributing	  social	  and	  physical	  meaning	  to	  ambiguous	  visual	  displays	  in	  	  

	  

	  

individuals	  with	  higher	  functioning	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Brain	  and	  Cognition,	  61,	  40-­‐53.	  	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  16497422]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 67 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

White,	  S.	  W.,	  Scahill,	  L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Koenig,	  K.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2007).	  Educational	  placements	  and	  service	  

	  

	  

use	  patterns	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(8),	  1403-­‐12.	  [PMID:	  17082975]	  

	  

	  

Saulnier,	  C.	  A.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2007).	  Social	  and	  communication	  abilities	  and	  disabilities	  in	  higher	  	   	  

	  

	  

functioning	  individuals	  with	  autism	  and	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(4),	  788-­‐93.	  [PMID:	  17160458]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Saulnier,	  C.	  A.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Lord,	  C.	  (2007).	  Social	  and	  	  

	  

	  

communication	  abilities	  and	  disabilities	  in	  higher	  functioning	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(4),	  748-­‐59.	  [PMID:	  17146708]	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2007).	  Autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  in	  the	  second	  	  

	  

	  

year:	  stability	  and	  change	  in	  syndrome	  expression.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  	   	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  48(2),	  128-­‐	  138.	  [PMID:	  17300551]	  

	  

	  

Kleinman,	  J.	  M.,	  Ventola,	  P.	  E.,	  Pandey,	  J.,	  Boorstein,	  H.	  C.,	  Esser,	  E.	  L.,	  Wilson,	  L.	  B.,	  Rosenthal,	  M.	  A.,	  	  

	  

	  

Sutera,	  S.,	  Verbalis,	  A.	  D.,	  Marshia,	  G.,	  Baron,	  M.,	  Hodgson,	  S.,	  Green,	  J.,	  Dumont-­‐Mathieu,	  T.	  	  

	  

	  

M.,	  Robins,	  D.	  L.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Fein,	  D.	  (2007).	  The	  Modified	  Checklist	  for	  Autism	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Toddlers:	  A	  follow-­‐up	  study	  investigating	  the	  early	  detection	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  	 	   

	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  38(5),	  827-­‐839.	  [PMID:	  17882539]	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Hannigen,	  S.,	  Dichtel,	  L.	  E.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2007).	  Parental	  	   	  

	  

	  

recognition	  of	  developmental	  problems	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(1),	  62-­‐72.	  [PMID:	  17195921]	  

	  

	  

Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Koenig,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  	  (2007).	  Reliability	  of	  the	  ADI-­‐R:	  Multiple	  	  

	  

	  

examiners	  evaluate	  a	  single	  case.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  38(4),	  764-­‐	  

	  

	  

770.	  [PMID:	  18058216]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Danovitch,	  J.	  H.,	  Dohrmann,	  E.	  H.,	  Merz,	  A.	  B.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2007).	  Circumscribed	  interests	  	  

	  

	  

in	  higher-­‐functioning	  individuals	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  an	  exploratory	  study.	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

Research	  and	  Practice	  for	  Persons	  with	  Severe	  Disabilities,	  32(2),	  89-­‐100.	  	  

	  

	  

Bakkaloglu,	  B.,	  O’Roak,	  B.	  J.,	  Louvi,	  A.,	  Gupta,	  A.	  R.,	  Abelson,	  J.	  F.,	  Morgan,	  T.	  M.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  	  

	  

	  

A.,	  Ercan-­‐Sencicek,	  G.,	  Stillman,	  A.	  A.,	  Tanriover,	  G.,	  Abrahams,	  B.	  S.,	  Duvall,	  J.	  A.,	  Robbins,	  E.J.,	  	  

	  

	  

Geschwind,	  D.	  H.,	  Biederer,	  T.,	  Gunel,	  M.,	  Lifton,	  R.	  P.,	  &	  State,	  M.	  W.	  (2008).	  Molecular	  	  	  

	  

	  

cytogenetic	  analysis	  and	  resequencing	  of	  Contactin	  Associated	  Protein-­‐Like	  2	  in	  autism	  	   	  

	  

	  

spectrum	  disorders.	  The	  American	  Journal	  of	  Human	  Genetics,	  82,	  165-­‐173.	  [PMCID:	  	   	  

	  

	  

PMC2253974]	  [PMID:	  18179895]	  

	  

	  

Kim,	  H.	  G.,	  Kishikawa,	  S.,	  Higgins,	  A.,	  Seong,	  I-­‐S.,	  Donovan,	  D.,	  Shen,	  Y.,	  Lally,	  E.,	  Weiss,	  L.,	  Najm,	  J.,	  	  

	  

	  

Kutsche,	  K.,	  Descartes,	  M.,	  Holt,	  L.,	  Braddock,	  S.,	  Troxell,	  R.,	  Kaplan,	  L.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 68 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Tsatsanis,	  K.,	  Noens,	  I.,	  Pauls,	  D.,	  Daly,	  M.	  J.,	  MacDonald,	  M.	  E.,	  Morton,	  C.C.,	  Quade,	  B.	  J.,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

Gusella,	  J.	  F.	  (2008).	  Disruption	  of	  neurexin	  1	  (NRXN1)	  associated	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  	   	  

	  

	  

disorder.	  Journal	  of	  Human	  Genetics,	  82,	  199-­‐207.	  [PMID:	  18179900]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Bianchi,	  N.,	  Augustyn,	  A.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2008).	  	  Production	  of	  syllable	  stress	  in	  	  

	  

	  

speakers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Research	  in	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders,	  2,	  110-­‐124.	  	  

	  

	  

[PMCID:	  PMC2662623]	  [PMID:	  19337577]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2008).	  Altered	  face	  scanning	  and	  impaired	  recognition	  of	  biological	  motion	  in	  a	  	  

	  

	  

15-­‐month-­‐old	  infant	  with	  autism.	  Developmental	  Science,	  11(1),	  40-­‐6.	  [PMID:	  18171365]	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  Carr,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  Absence	  of	  preferential	  looking	  to	  the	  eyes	  of	  approaching	  adults	  	  

	  

	  

predicts	  level	  of	  social	  disability	  in	  2-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  	  

	  

	  

65(8),	  946-­‐54.	  [PMID:	  18678799]	  

	  	  

	  

Vanbergeijk,	  E.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2008).	  Supporting	  more	  able	  students	  on	  the	  autism	  	   	  

	  

	  

spectrum:	  college	  and	  beyond.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  38(7),	  1359-­‐70.	  	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  18172747]	  

	  

	  

Reichow,	  B.,	  Salamak,	  S.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  Pragmatic	  assessment	  in	  	  

	  

	  

speakers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  a	  comparison	  of	  a	  standard	  measure	  with	  parent	  	  

	  

	  

report.	  Communication	  Disorders	  Quarterly,	  29(3),	  169-­‐176.	  [PMCID:	  PMC2952952]	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

20948979]	  

	  

	  

Goldstein,	  G.,	  Allen,	  D.	  N.,	  Minshew,	  N.	  J.,	  Williams,	  D.	  L.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  (2008).	  

	  

	  

The	  structure	  of	  intelligence	  in	  children	  and	  adults	  with	  high	  functioning	  autism.	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Neuropsychology,	  22(3),	  301-­‐12.	  [PMID:	  18444708]	  

	  

	  

Pandey,	  J.,	  Verbalis,	  A.,	  Robins,	  D.	  L.,	  Boorstein,	  H.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Babitz,	  T.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  	  

	  

	  

Green,	  J.,	  Barton,	  M.,	  &	  Fein,	  D.	  (2008).	  Screening	  for	  autism	  in	  older	  and	  younger	  toddlers	  with	  

	  

	  

the	  Modified	  Checklist	  for	  Autism	  in	  Toddlers.	  Autism,	  12(5),	  513-­‐35.	  [PMID:	  18805945]	  

	  

	  

Fernandez,	  T.,	  Morgan,	  T.	  M.,	  Davis,	  N.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Morris,	  A.,	  Farhi,	  A.,	  Lifton,	  R.	  P.,	  &	  State,	  M.	  W.	  	  

	  

	  

(2008).	  Disruption	  of	  Contactin	  4	  (CNTN4)	  results	  in	  developmental	  delay	  and	  other	  features	  of	  	  

	  

	  

3p	  deletion	  syndrome.	  American	  Journal	  of	  Human	  Genetics,	  82(6),	  1385.	  [PMCID:	  	   	  

	  

	  

PMC2661627]	  [PMID:	  18551756]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Lin,	  D.	  J.,	  Gorrindo,	  P.,	  Ramsay,	  G.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2009).	  Two-­‐year-­‐olds	  with	  autism	  fail	  to	  orient	  	  

	  

	  

towards	  human	  biological	  motion	  but	  attend	  instead	  to	  non-­‐social,	  physical	  contingencies.	  	  

	  

	  

Nature,	  459,	  257-­‐261.	  [PMCID:	  PMC2758571]	  [PMID:	  19329996]	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Macari,	  S.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2009).	  A	  prospective	  study	  of	  toddlers	  with	  	  

	  

	  

autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  Short-­‐term	  diagnostic	  and	  cognitive	  outcomes.	  Journal	  of	  Child	  	  

	  

	  

Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  50(10),	  1235-­‐1245.	  [PMID:	  19594835]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 69 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Wang,	  K.,	  Zhang,	  H.,	  Ma,	  D.,	  Bucan,	  M.,	  Glessner,	  G.T.,	  Abrahams,	  B.	  S.,	  Salyakina,	  D.,	  Imielinski,	  M.,	  	  

	  

	  

Bradfield,	  J.	  P.,	  Sleiman,	  P.	  M.	  A.,	  Kim,	  C.	  E.,	  Chiavacci,	  R.,	  Takahashi,	  N.,	  Sakurai,	  T.,	  Rappaport,	  	  

	  

	  

E.,	  Lajonchere,	  C.	  A.,	  Munson,	  J.,	  Estes,	  A.,	  Korvatska,	  O.,	  Piven,	  J.,	  Sonnenblick,	  L.	  I.,	  Retuerto,	  	  

	  

	  

A.	  I.	  A.,	  Herman,	  E.	  I.,	  Dong,	  H.,	  Hutman,	  T.,	  Sigman,	  M.,	  Ozonoff,	  S.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Owley,	  T.,	  	   	  

	  

	  

Sweeney,	  J.	  A.,	  Brune,	  C.	  W.,	  Cantor,	  R.,	  Bernier,	  R.,	  Gilbert,	  J.	  R.,	  Cuccaro,	  M.	  L.,	  Wassink,	  T.	  H.,	  	  

	  

	  

McMahon,	  W.	  M.,Coon,	  H.,	  Miller,	  J.,	  Nurnberger,	  Jr.,	  State,	  M.	  W.,	  Haines,	  J.	  L.,	  Levy,	  S.	  E.,	  	  

	  

	  

Sutcliffe,	  J.	  S.,	  Cook,	  E.	  H.,	  Minshew,	  N.	  J.,	  Buxbaum,	  J.	  D.,	  Dawson,	  G.,	  Grant,	  S.	  F.	  A.,	  	   	  

	  

	  

Geschwind,	  D.	  H.,	  Pericak-­‐Vance,	  M.	  A.,	  Schellenberg,	  G.	  D.,	  &	  Hakonarson,	  H.	  (2009).	  Common	  	  

	  

	  

genetic	  variation	  in	  the	  intergenic	  region	  between	  CDH10	  and	  CDH9	  is	  associated	  with	  	   	  

	  

	  

susceptibility	  to	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Nature,	  459(7246),	  528-­‐33.	  [PMID:	  19404256]	  

	  

	  

New,	  J.	  J.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  Wolf,	  J.,	  Niehaus,	  J.	  L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  German,	  T.	  C.,	  &	  Scholl,	  B.	  J.	  (2010).	  The	  scope	  	  

	  

	  

of	  social	  attention	  deficits	  in	  autism:	  Prioritized	  orienting	  to	  people	  and	  animals	  in	  static	  natural	  

	  

	  

scenes.	  Neuropsychologia,	  48,	  51-­‐59.	  [PMID:	  19686766]	  

	  

	  

White,	  S.	  W.,	  Albano,	  A.	  M.,	  Johnson,	  C.,	  Kasari,	  C.,	  Ollendick,	  T.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Oswald,	  D.,	  &	  Scahill,	  L.	  	  

	  

	  

(2010).	  Development	  of	  a	  cognitive-­‐behavioral	  intervention	  program	  to	  treat	  anxiety	  and	  	  

	  

	  

social	  deficits	  in	  teens	  with	  high-­‐functioning	  autism.	  Clinical	  Child	  and	  Family	  Psychology	  	  

	  

	  

Review,	  13(1),	  77-­‐90.	  [PMID:	  200091348]	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Volkmar,	  F.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2010).	  Limited	  attentional	  bias	  for	  faces	  in	  toddlers	  with	  autism	  	  

	  

	  

spectrum	  disorders.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  67(2),	  178-­‐185.	  [PMID:	  201241117]	  	   	  

	  

	  

Kaiser,	  M.	  D.,	  Hudac,	  C.	  M.,	  Shultz,	  S.,	  Lee,	  S.	  M.,	  Cheung,	  C.,	  Berken,	  A.	  M.,	  Deen,	  B.,	  Pitskel,	  N.	  B.,	  	  

	  

	  

Sugrue,	  D.	  R.,	  Voos,	  A.	  C.,	  Saulnier,	  C.	  A.,	  Ventola,	  P.,	  Wolf,	  J.	  M.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Vander	  Wyk,	  B.	  C.,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

Pelphrey,	  K.	  A.	  (2010).	  Neural	  signatures	  of	  autism.	  Proceedings	  of	  the	  National	  Academy	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Sciences,	  107(49),	  21223-­‐8.	  [PMID:	  21078973]	  	  

	  

	  

Vander	  Wyk,	  B.	  C.,	  Ramsay,	  G.	  J.,	  Hudac,	  C.	  M.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Lin,	  D.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Lee,	  S.	  M.,	  &	  Pelphrey,	  K.	  A.	  	  

	  

	  

(2010).	  Cortical	  integration	  of	  audio-­‐visual	  information.	  Brain	  Cognition,	  74(2),	  97-­‐106.	  [PMID	  	  

	  

	  

20709442]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Fuerst,	  Y.,	  Ramsay,	  G.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2011).	  Out	  of	  the	  mouths	  of	  babes:	  vocal	  	  

	  

	  

production	  in	  infant	  siblings	  of	  children	  with	  ASD.	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  &	  Psychiatry,	  	  

	  

	  

52(5),	  588-­‐98.	   doi:10.1111.	  [PMID:	  21039489]	  

	  

	  

Shic,	  F.,	  Bradshaw,	  J.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Scassellati,	  B.,	  &	  Chawarska,	  K.	  (2011).	  Limited	  activity	  monitoring	  in	  	  

	  

	  

toddlers	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorder.	  Brain	  Research,	  1380,	  246-­‐254.	  doi:	  	   	  

	  

	  

	  

10.1016/jbrainres.2010.11.074.	  [PMID:	  21129365]	  	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Campbell,	  D.,	  Chen,	  L.,	  Shic,	  F.,	  Klin,	  A.	  &	  Chang,	  J.	  (2011).	  Early	  generalized	  overgrowth	  	  

	  

	  

in	  boys	  with	  autism.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  68(10),	  1021-­‐31.	  [PMID	  21969460]	  	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 70 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

McPartland,	  J.	  C.,	  Wu,	  J.,	  Bailey,	  C.	  A.,	  Mayes,	  L.	  C.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2011).	  Atypical	  neural	  	  

	  

	  

specialization	  for	  social	  percepts	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorder.	  Social	  Neuroscience,	  6(5-­‐6),	  436-­‐	  

	  

	  

51.	  [PMID	  21777159]	  	  

	  

	  

Shultz,	  S.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2011).	  	  Inhibition	  of	  eye	  blinking	  reveals	  subjective	  perceptions	  of	  	  

	  

	  

stimulus	  salience.	  Proceedings	  of	  the	  National	  Academy	  of	  Sciences,	  108(52),	  21270-­‐5.	  [PMID	  	  

	  

	  

22160686]	  	  

	  

	  

Tsatsanis,	  K.	  D.,	  Noens,	  I.	  L.	  J.,	  Illmann,	  C.	  L.,	  Pauls,	  D.	  L.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2011).	  

	  

	  

Managing	  complexity:	  impact	  of	  organization	  and	  processing	  style	  on	  nonverbal	  memory	  in	  	  

	  

	  

autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  41(2),	  135-­‐47.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

21128108]	  

	  

	  

Ventola,	  P.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Steinberg,	  E.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2011).	  Early-­‐Emerging	  Social	  Adaptive	  	  

	  

	  

Skills	  in	  Toddlers	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders:	  An	  Item	  Analysis.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders	  [DOI:	  10.1007/s10803-­‐011-­‐1278-­‐x]	  online	  first	  

	  

	  

Rice,	  K.,	  Moriuchi,	  J.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2012).	  Parsing	  heterogeneity	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  	  

	  

	  

visual	  scanning	  of	  dynamic	  social	  scenes	  in	  school-­‐age	  children.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  	  	  

	  

	  

Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  (51)3,	  238-­‐248.	  

	  

	  

Macari,	  S.	  L.,	  Campbell,	  D.,	  Grace,	  W.G.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Chawarska,	  K.	  (2012).	  Predicting	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Status	  from	  12	  to	  24	  Months	  in	  Infants	  at	  Risk	  for	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorder:	  A	  	  

	  

	  

Preliminary	  Report.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(1).	  [PMID:	  22484794]	  	  

	  

	  

[epub	  ahead	  of	  print]	  

	  

	  

	  

Lord,	  C.,	  Petkova,	  E.,	  Hus,	  V.,	  Gan,	  W.,	  Lu,	  F.,	  Martin,	  D.	  M.,	  Ousley,	  O.,	  Guy,	  L.,	  Bernier,	  R.,	  Gerdts,	  J.,	  	  

	  

	  

Algermissen,	  M.,	  Whitaker,	  A.,	  Sutcliffe,	  J.,	  Warren,	  Z.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Hanson,	  E.,	  Hundley,	  

	  

	  

R.,	  Piggot,	  J.,	  Fombonne,	  E.,	  Steiman,	  M.,	  Miles,	  J.,	  Kanne,	  S.,	  Goin-­‐Kochel,	  R.	  P.,	  Peters,	  S.	  U.,	  	  

	  

	  

Cook	  ,	  E.	  H.,	  Guter,	  S.,	  Tjernagle,	  J.,	  Green-­‐Snyder,	  L.,	  Bishop,	  S.,	  Esler,	  A.,	  Gotham,	  K.,	  Lyuster,	  	  

	  

	  

R.,	  Miller,	  F.,	  Olson,	  J.,	  Richler,	  J.,	  &	  Risi,	  S.	  (2012).	  A	  Multisite	  Study	  of	  the	  Clinical	  Diagnosis	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Different	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders.	  Archives	  of	  General	  Psychiatry,	  69	  (3).	  [epub	  ahead	  of	  	  

	  

	  

print]	  

	  

	  

Steiner,	  A.	  M.,	  Gengoux,	  G.	  W.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Chawarska,	  K.	  (2012).	  Pivotal	  Response	  Treatment	  for	  Infants	  

	  

	  

At-­‐Risk	  for	  Autism	  Specturm	  Disorders:	  A	  Pilot	  Study.	  	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders.	  [PMID:	  22573001]	  [epub	  ahead	  of	  print]	  

	  

	  

b.	   Manuscripts	  submitted	  or	  in	  preparation:	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin	  A.	  	  Entrainment	  to	  social	  context	  in	  typically-­‐developing	  two-­‐year-­‐olds	  and	  the	  	  

	  

	  

absence	  thereof	  in	  autism.	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 71 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  The	  development	  of	  social	  visual	  engagement	  from	  birth	  until	  age	  three.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  Diagnostic	  indicators	  of	  autism	  in	  the	  first	  6	  months	  of	  life.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  Knoch,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  Shifting	  visual	  attention	  in	  adolescents	  with	  autism:	  reaction	  times	  are	  	  

	  

	  

equivalent	  but	  first	  fixations	  are	  random.	  

	  

	  

Knoch,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  Shifting	  visual	  attention	  in	  school-­‐age	  children	  with	  autism.	  

	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  Zampella,	  C.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  	  Oculomotor	  function	  in	  children	  with	  ASD	  during	  a	  natural	  viewing	  	  

	  

	  

task.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  Krasno,	  A.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  	  Measures	  of	  implicit	  social	  attribution	  by	  visual	  scanning	  in	  children	  	  

	  

	  

with	  autism.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  Edwards,	  L.	  A.,	  and	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  Visual	  scanning	  of	  dynamic	  faces	  in	  relation	  to	  varying	  	   	  

	  

	  

positive	  and	  negative	  affect.	  	  

	  

	  

Shultz,	  S.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  McPartland,	  J.	  	  Social	  context	  modulates	  neural	  responses	  to	  human	  	  

	  

	  

faces.	  

	  

	  

Sharp,	  W.	  G.,	  Berry,	  R.	  C.,	  McCracken,	  C.,	  Nuhu,	  N.	  N.,	  Marvel,	  E.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

Jaquess,	  D.	  Feeding	  problems	  and	  nutrient	  intake	  in	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  A	  	  

	  

	  

meta-­‐analysis	  and	  comprehensive	  review	  of	  the	  literature.	  

	  

	  

c.	  	   Editorials,	  case	  reports,	  letters,	  book	  forewords,	  book	  reviews	  :	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1993).	  Elective	  mutism	  and	  mental	  retardation.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  	  

	  

	  

Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  32(4),	  860-­‐864.	  [PMID:	  8340310]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  B.,	  Bronen,	  R.,	  Marans,	  W.	  D.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1996).	  

	  

	  

Asperger’s	  syndrome.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  	  

	  

	  

35(1),	  118-­‐123.	  [PMID:	  8567603]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  Rubin,	  E.,	  &	  Bronen,	  R.	  (2000).	  Asperger’s	  disorder.	  American	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  157(2),	  262-­‐267.	  [PMID:	  10671397]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  Rubin,	  E.,	  Bronen,	  R.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2001).	  Asperger’s	  disorder:	  Dr.	  Klin	  and	  	  

	  

	  

colleagues	  reply.	  American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  158(3),	  502-­‐503.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2001).	  Forward.	  In	  L.	  Wing	  (Ed.)	  The	  Autistic	  Spectrum:	  A	  Parent’s	  Guide	  to	  	  

	  

	  

Understanding	  and	  Helping	  Your	  Child	  (pp.	  	  ix).	  Berkley,	  CA:	  Ulysses	  Press,	  2001.	  	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 72 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	5  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Anderson,	  G.	  M.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Paul,	  R.	  (2002).	  Obituary:	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen	  1940-­‐2001.	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  32(3),	  241-­‐242.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2002).	  Bright	  splinters	  of	  the	  mind:	  A	  personal	  story	  of	  research	  with	  autistic	  savants:	  by	  Beate	  

	  

	  

Hermelin.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  43(6),	  824-­‐825.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2003).	  Defining	  and	  quantifying	  the	  social	  phenotype	  

	  

	  

in	  autism.	  Dr.	  Klin	  and	  colleagues	  reply.	  The	  American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  160(7),	  1359-­‐1360.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Invited	  commentary	  on	  “Behavioural	  and	  learning	  problems	  in	  	  	  

	  

	  

school	  children	  related	  to	  cognitive	  test	  data”.	  Acta	  Paediatrica,	  93,	  1-­‐3.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Invited	  commentary	  on	  “Challenging	  Case”.	  Journal	  of	  Developmental	  &	  Behavioral	  	  

	  

	  

Pediatrics,	  25(3),	  190-­‐195.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Autism	  and	  difficulty	  levels	  in	  social	  visual	  pursuit.	  Dr.	  Klin	  replies.	  American	  Journal	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  161(5),	  933-­‐934.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2004).	  Autism,	  movement,	  and	  facial	  processing.	  Dr.	  Klin	  	  

	  

	  

and	  colleagues	  reply.	  American	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  161(9),	  1719-­‐1720.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  The	  cradle	  of	  thought:	  Exploring	  the	  origins	  of	  thinking.	  American	  Journal	  of	  Mental	  	  

	  

	  

Retardation,	  109(3),	  267-­‐269.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  	  Editorial	  preface	  to	  special	  edition:	  Aspergers	  syndrome.	  	   	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  35(2),	  141-­‐143.	  	  

	  

	  

Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2006).	  What’s	  so	  special	  about	  Asperger	  Syndrome?	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

The	  cognitive	  neuroscience	  of	  Aspergers	  syndrome.	  	  Brain	  Cognition,	  61(1),	  1-­‐4.	  [PMID:	  	   	  

	  

	  

16563588]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Mercadante,	  M.	  T.	  (2006).	  	  Editorial	  preface	  to	  special	  supplement	  on	  autism:	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

Autism	  and	  the	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders.	  Brazilian	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry	  (Revista	  	  

	  

	  

Brasileira	  de	  Psiquiatria),	  28	  (Supl	  I),	  S1-­‐2.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2006).	  The	  social	  neuroscience	  of	  autism.	  Biological	  Psychiatry,	  59,	  192S.	  	  

	  

	  

Shic,	  F.,	  Jones,	  W.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Scassellati,	  B.	  (2006).	  Swimming	  in	  the	  underlying	  stream:	  computational	  	  

	  

	  

models	  of	  gaze	  in	  a	  comparative	  behavioral	  analysis	  of	  autism.	  The	  Cognitive	  Science	  Society	  	  

	  

	  

2006	  meeting,	  Vancouver,	  Canada.	  This	  paper	  was	  the	  recipient	  of	  the	  Best	  Applied	  Modeling	  	  

	  

	  

Paper.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  In	  the	  eye	  of	  the	  beholden:	  tracking	  developmental	  psychopathology.	  Journal	  of	  the	  	  

	  

	  

American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  47(4),	  362-­‐3.	  [PMID:	  18356702]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 73 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	6  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  Three	  things	  to	  remember	  if	  you	  are	  a	  functional	  magnetic	  resonance	  imaging	  	   	  

	  

	  

researcher	  of	  face	  processing	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  Biological	  Psychiatry,	  64(7),	  549-­‐51.	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  18778978]	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2009).	  Embracing	  the	  challenge	  of	  bold	  theories	  of	  autism.	  British	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry,	  100,	  	  

	  

	  

29-­‐32.	  [PMID:	  19012812]	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  	  (2009).	  Heterogeneity	  and	  homogeneity	  across	  the	  autism	  spectrum:	  the	  role	  of	  	  

	  

	  

development.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  48(5),	  471-­‐	  

	  

	  

3.	  [PMID:	  19395902]	  

	  

	  

d.	   Reviews	  &	  Chapters:	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (1989).	  Understanding	  early	  infantile	  autism:	  An	  application	  of	  G.H.	  Mead's	  theory	  of	  the	  	  

	  

	  

emergence	  of	  mind.	  London	  School	  of	  Economics	  Quarterly,	  4(3),	  336-­‐356.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (1993).	  	  Auditory	  brain	  stem	  responses	  in	  autism:	  brain	  stem	  dysfunction	  or	  peripheral	  	   	  

	  

	  

hearing	  loss?	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  23(1),	  15-­‐35.	  [PMID:	  8463195]	  

	  

	  

Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Anderson,	  G.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (1993).	  Integrating	  biological	  and	  behavioral	  	  

	  

	  

perspectives	  in	  the	  study	  and	  care	  of	  autistic	  individuals:	  The	  future	  ahead.	  Israel	  Journal	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry	  and	  Related	  Sciences,	  30(1),	  15-­‐32.	  [PMID:	  8101835]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1993).	  The	  development	  of	  individuals	  with	  autism:	  Implications	  for	  the	  	  

	  

	  

Theory	  of	  Mind	  hypothesis.	  In	  Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.,	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  H.,	  and	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (Eds.),	  	  

	  

	  

Understanding	  Other	  Minds:	  Perspectives	  From	  Autism	  (pp.	  317-­‐331).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  	  

	  

	  

Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (1993).	  Social	  development	  in	  autism:	  Historical	  and	  clinical	  perspectives.	  In	  	  

	  

	  

Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.,	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  H.,	  and	  Cohen,	  D.	  J,	  (Eds.),	  Understanding	  Other	  Minds:	  	  

	  

	  

Perspectives	  From	  Autism	  (pp.	  40	  –	  55).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Mayes,	  L.	  C.,	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (1993).	  Desire	  and	  fantasy:	  A	  psychoanalytic	  perspective	  on	  	  

	  

	  

Theory	  of	  Mind	  and	  autism.	  In	  Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.,	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  H.	  and	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (Eds.),	  	  

	  

	  

Understanding	  Other	  Minds:	  Perspectives	  From	  Autism	  (pp.	  450-­‐465).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  	  

	  

	  

Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (1994).	  Behavioral	  issues	  in	  autism.	  American	  Journal	  of	  Mental	  Retardation,	  101(1),	  92-­‐95.	  	  

	  

	  

New	  York,	  NY:	  Plenum	  Press.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  	  (1994).	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  3(1),	  	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 74 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	7  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

131-­‐148.	  (Reprinted	  in	  the	  Official	  Newsletter	  of	  the	  Autism	  Society	  of	  America	  (July	  1994);	  	  

	  

	  

Partially	  reprinted	  in	  the	  Newsletter	  of	  the	  Learning	  Disabilities	  Association	  of	  America	  	   	  

	  

	  

(September	  1994).	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Shepard,	  B.	  	  (1994).	  Psychological	  assessment	  of	  autistic	  children.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  	  

	  

	  

Academy	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  3(1),	  53-­‐70.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1994).	  The	  immorality	  of	  not	  knowing:	  The	  ethical	  imperative	  to	  conduct	  	  

	  

	  

research	  in	  child	  psychiatry.	  In	  Y.	  Hattab	  (Ed.),	  Ethics	  in	  Child	  Psychiatry	  (pp.	  217-­‐232).	  	   	  

	  

	  

Jerusalem:	  Gefen	  Publishers.	  (A.	  Martin	  &	  R.	  A.	  King,	  (Eds.),	  Reprinted	  in	  Donald	  J.	  Cohen:	  Life	  Is	  

	  

	  

With	  Others,	  Selected	  Writings	  in	  Child	  Psychiatry.	  Yale	  University	  Press,	  New	  Haven,	  CT.,	  1994,	  	  

	  

	  

pp.	  207-­‐224).	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  &	  Rourke,	  B.	  P.	  (1995).	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  In	  	  

	  

	  

B.	  P.	  Rourke	  (Ed.),	  Syndrome	  of	  Nonverbal	  Learning	  Disabilities:	  Neurodevelopmental	  	   	  

	  

	  

Manifestations	  (pp.	  93-­‐118).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Cohen,	  D.J.	  (1994).	  Theoretical	  perspectives	  on	  autism.	  Signal,	  the	  Newsletter	  of	  the	  	  

	  

	  

World	  Association	  of	  Infant	  Mental	  Health,	  2(2),	  7-­‐12.	  (Reprinted	  in	  Psychiatrie	  de	  l’enfant,	  	  

	  

	  

XXXVIII,	  2,	  477-­‐494,	  1995).	  [PMID:	  8657798]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1995).	  Autism	  and	  the	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders.	  Child	  &	  	   	  

	  

	  

Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  4(3),	  617-­‐630.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Mayes,	  L.	  C.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1995).	  Multiplex	  Developmental	  Disorder.	  Journal	  	  

	  

	  

of	  Developmental	  &	  Behavioral	  Pediatrics,	  16(3),	  S7-­‐S11.	  	  [PMID:	  7560130]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Marans,	  W.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1996).	  	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  	  

	  

	  

Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  5(4),	  963-­‐977.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1996).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders:	  Nosology	  and	  profiles	  of	  	  

	  

	  

development.	  In	  S.,	  Luthar,	  J.	  Burack,	  D.	  Cicchetti,	  &	  J.	  Wiesz	  (Eds.),	  Developmental	  	   	  

	  

	  

Perspectives	  on	  Risk	  and	  Psychopathology	  (pp.	  208-­‐226).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Cambridge	  	   	  

	  

	  

University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Marans,	  W.	  D.,	  &	  McDougle,	  C.	  J.	  (1996).	  Autistic	  Disorder.	  	  In	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar,	  

	  

	  

(Ed.),	  Psychoses	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders	  in	  Childhood	  and	  Adolescence	  (pp.	  129-­‐	  

	  

	  

190).	  Washington,	  D.C.:	  American	  Psychiatric	  Press,	  Inc.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1997).	  Asperger’s	  syndrome.	  In	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  &	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.)	  	  	   	  

	  

	  

Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.	  94-­‐122).	  New	  	  

	  

	  

York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 75 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	8  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Carter,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.,	  Marans,	  W.	  D.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.	  (1997).	  Assessment	  	  

	  

	  

issues	  in	  children	  with	  autism.	  In	  D.J.	  Cohen	  &	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.	  411	  –	  418).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Carter,	  A.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.	  (1997).	  Psychological	  assessment.	  In	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  &	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  	  

	  

	  

(Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.	  418-­‐427).	  	  

	  

	  

New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1997).	  Diagnosis	  and	  classification	  of	  autism	  and	  related	  	   	  

	  

	  

conditions:	  Consensus	  and	  issues.	  	  In	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  &	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.)	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  

	  

	  

Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.	  5-­‐40).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1997).	  Ethical	  issues	  in	  research	  and	  treatment.	  In	  D.J.	  Cohen	  &	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  	  

	  

	  

(Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.	  828-­‐841).	  	  

	  

	  

New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Marans,	  W.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1997).	  Childhood	  Disintegrative	  Disorder.	  	  In	  D.	  J.	  	  

	  

	  

Cohen	  &	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  	  

	  

	  

edition	  (pp.	  47-­‐59).	  	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Carter,	  A.,	  Grossman,	  J.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (1997).	  Social	  development	  in	  autism.	  In	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  	  

	  

	  

&	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  2nd	  edition	  

	  

	  

(pp.	  173-­‐194).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1997).	  Autism	  and	  the	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders.	  In	  J.	  D.	  Noshpitz,	  	  

	  

	  

S.	  Greenspan,	  S.	  Wieder,	  &	  J.	  Osofsky	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry.	  	  

	  

	  

Volume	  One:	  Infants	  and	  Preschoolers:	  Development	  and	  syndromes	  (pp.	  536-­‐560).	  New	  	  

	  

	  

York,	  NY:	  Wiley.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (1998).	  Asperger	  syndrome	  and	  nonverbal	  learning	  disabilities.	  In	  E.	  Schopler	  	  

	  

	  

&	  G.	  B.	  Mesibov	  (Eds.),	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  or	  High	  Functioning	  Autism	  (pp.107-­‐122).	  New	  York,	  	  

	  

	  

NY:	  Plenum	  Press.	  	  

	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (1998).	  The	  nonautistic	  pervasive	  developmental	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  C.	  E.	  Coffey,	  &	  R.	  A.	  Brumback,	  (Eds.),	  Textbook	  of	  Pediatric	  Neuropsychiatry	  (pp.	  	  

	  

	  

429-­‐447).	  Washington	  D.C.:	  American	  Psychiatric	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (1999).	  Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  In	  S.	  Goldstein,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

C.	  R.	  Reynolds	  (Eds).	  Handbook	  of	  Neurodevelopmental	  and	  Genetic	  Disorders	  in	  Children	  (pp.	  	  

	  

	  

247-­‐274).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.	  Cohen,	  D.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (1999).	  Multiplex	  developmental	  disorders:	  The	  role	  of	  	  

	  

	  

communication	  in	  the	  construction	  of	  a	  self.	  	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  	  

	  

	  

America,	  8(1),	  189-­‐203.	  [PMID:	  9894036]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 76 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  5	  	  	9  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2000).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  In	  H.	  Kaplan	  &	  B.	  Sadock	  	  

	  

	  

(Eds.),	  Comprehensive	  Textbook	  of	  Psychiatry,	  7th	  edition	  (pp.	  2659-­‐2678).	  Philadelphia,	  PA:	  	  

	  

	  

Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.	  (2000).	  Introduction.	  In	  A.	  Klin,	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  &	  S.	  S.	  Sparrow	  	  

	  

	  

(Eds.),	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  (pp.	  1-­‐21).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2000).	  Diagnostic	  issues	  in	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  	  In	  A.	  Klin,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  	  

	  

	  

S.	  S.	  Sparrow	  (Eds.),	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  (pp.	  25-­‐71).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  	  Guilford	  Press.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.,	  Marans,	  W.	  D.,	  Carter,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2000).	  Assessment	  issues	  in	  	   	  

	  

	  

Asperger	  syndrome.	  In	  A.	  Klin,	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  &	  S.	  S.	  Sparrow	  (Eds.),	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  (pp.	  309-­‐	  

	  

	  

339).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2000).	  Treatment	  and	  intervention	  guidelines	  for	  individuals	  with	  Asperger	  	  

	  

	  

syndrome.	  In	  A.	  Klin,	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  &	  S.	  S.	  Sparrow	  (Eds.),	  Asperger	  Syndrome	  (pp.340-­‐366).	  	  

	  

	  

New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  (2000).	  Theory	  of	  Mind	  in	  action:	  developmental	  perspectives	  on	  social	  

	  

	  

neuroscience.	  In	  S.	  Baron-­‐Cohen,	  H.	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  &	  D.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Understanding	  Other	  	  

	  

	  

Minds:	  Perspectives	  from	  Developmental	  Neuroscience,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.357-­‐388).	  Oxford,	  	  

	  

	  

United	  Kingdom:	  	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Koenig,	  K.,	  Rubin,	  E.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2000).	  Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	  developmental	  	   	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  C.	  H.	  Zeanah	  (Ed.),	  Handbook	  of	  Infant	  Mental	  Health,	  2nd	  edition	  (pp.298-­‐310).	  	  

	  

	  

New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2000).	  Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  In	  M.	  G.	  	  

	  

	  

Gelder,	  J.	  J.	  López-­‐Ibor,	  &	  N.	  Andreasen	  (Eds.),	  New	  Oxford	  Textbook	  of	  Psychiatry,	  Volume	  2	  	  

	  

	  

(pp.	  1723-­‐1734).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2001).	  	  Asperger’s	  disorder	  and	  higher	  functioning	  autism:	  Same	  or	  	   	  

	  

	  

different?	  In	  L.	  M.	  Glidden	  (Ed.),	  International	  Review	  of	  Research	  in	  Mental	  Retardation	  (23,	  	  

	  

	  

83-­‐110).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Academic	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2001).	  Asperger’s	  syndrome.	  In	  M.	  J.	  Aminoff	  &	  R.	  B.	  Daroff	  (Eds.),	  	   	  

	  

	  

Encyclopedia	  of	  the	  Neurological	  Sciences,	  (pp.	  284-­‐85).	  San	  Diego,	  CA:	  Academic	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2002).	  The	  neural	  foundations	  of	  autism.	  Journal	  of	  the	  American	  Academy	  	  

	  

	  

of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry,	  41(10),	  1259-­‐1262.	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 77 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	0  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cook,	  E.	  Jr.	  (2002).	  Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	  developmental	  	   	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  M.	  Lewis	  (Ed.),	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  a	  comprehensive	  textbook,	  3rd	  	  

	  

	  

edition	  (pp.587-­‐597).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2003).	  The	  social	  brain	  in	  autism.	  In	  M.	  	  

	  

	  

Brüne,	  H.	  Ribbert,	  &	  W.	  Schienfenhövel	  (Eds.),	  The	  Social	  Brain:	  Evolution	  and	  Pathology	  (pp.	  	  

	  

	  

167-­‐196).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  John	  Wiley	  and	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2003).	  Preface	  to	  issue	  on	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  	  

	  

	  

Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  12:xiii-­‐xvi.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2003).	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  diagnosis	  and	  external	  validity.	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  12,	  1-­‐13.	  [PMID:	  12512395]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2003).	  Asperger	  syndrome:	  An	  update.	  Revista	  Brasileira	  de	  Psiquiatria,	  25(2),	  103-­‐9.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

12975708]	  

	  

	  

Grigorenko,	  E.L.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2003).	  Annotation:	  Hyperlexia:	  disability	  or	  superability?	  	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  44(8),	  1079-­‐1091.	  [PMID:	  14626452]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2003).	  History,	  definition,	  and	  diagnostic	  markers	  of	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  Perspectives	  on	  	  

	  

	  

Language	  Learning	  and	  Education,	  American	  Speech-­‐Language-­‐Hearing	  Association,	  Division	  1,	  	  

	  

	  

10(3),	  2-­‐4.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.R.	  (Eds.).	  (2003).	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  	  Child	  &	  Adolescent	  Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  	  

	  

	  

North	  America,	  12(1),	  xiii-­‐xvi.	  [PMID:	  12512394]	  

	  

	  

Stein,	  M.	  T.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Miller,	  K.	  	  (2004).	  When	  Asperger’s	  syndrome	  and	  a	  nonverbal	  learning	  disability	  	  

	  

	  

look	  alike.	  Journal	  of	  Developmental	  &	  Behavioral	  Pediatrics,	  25(3),	  190-­‐193.	  	  (Reprinted	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Journal	  of	  Developmental	  &	  Behavioral	  Pediatrics.	  25(5S),	  S59-­‐S64).	  [PMID:	  15502535]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Autism	  and	  Asperger’s	  syndrome.	  Encyclopedia	  of	  Psychology,	  

	  

	  

1,	  257-­‐260.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Bailey,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Autism	  and	  pervasive	  developmental	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  45(1),	  135-­‐70.	  [PMID:	  14959806]	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2004).	  Behavioral	  and	  learning	  problems	  in	  school	  children	  related	  to	  	   	  

	  

	  

cognitive	  test	  data.	  Acta	  Paediatrica,	  93,	  1-­‐3.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Rubin,	  E.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2004).	  Clinical	  assessment	  of	  toddlers	  at	  risk	  of	  	  

	  

	  

autism.	  In	  R.	  DelCarmen-­‐Wiggins	  &	  A.	  Carter	  (Eds).,	  Handbook	  of	  Infant	  and	  Toddler	  Mental	  	  

	  

	  

Health	   Assessment	  (pp.	  311-­‐336).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  Portuguese	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 78 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	1  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

translation:	  Avaliação	  clínica	  de	  crianças	  com	  risco	  de	  autismo.	  Educação,	  ano	  XXIX,	  n.	  1	  	  	  

	  

	  

(58),	  11-­‐53.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.	  (2005).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  In	  Sadock,	  B.	  J.	  	  

	  

	  

and	  Sadock,	  V.	  A.	  (Eds.),	  Comprehensive	  Textbook	  of	  Psychiatry,	  8th	  edition	  (pp.	  3164-­‐3182).	  	  	  

	  

	  

Philadelphia,	  PA:	  Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Paul,	  R.	  (2005).	  Preface.	  In	  F.R.	  Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.J.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  	  

	  

	  

Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition	  (pp.	  XV-­‐XIX).	  New	  	  

	  

	  

York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  	  

	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2005).	  Issues	  in	  the	  classification	  of	  autism	  and	  related	  conditions.	  In	  F.	  R.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  	 	   

	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition	  (pp.	  5-­‐41).	  	  New	  York,	  NY:	  	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  McPartland,	  J.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  In	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

D.	  J.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition	  	  

	  

	  

(pp.	  88-­‐125).	  	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Carter,	  A.	  S.,	  Davis,	  N.	  O.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  Social	  development	  in	  autism.	  In	  F.	  R.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  R.	  Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.J.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  

	  

	  

Disorders,	  3rd	  edition	  (pp.	  312-­‐334).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  	  	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Tsatsanis,	  K.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (2005).	  	  Clinical	  evaluation	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

disorders:	  psychological	  assessment	  within	  a	  transdisciplinary	  framework.	  In	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar,	  R.	  	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  D.	  J.	  Cohen	  (Eds.),	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  	  

	  

	  

3rd	  edition	  (pp.	  772-­‐798).	  	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.R.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2005).	  	  Autism	  in	  infancy	  and	  early	  childhood.	  In	  A.	  Kazdin	  	  

	  

	  

(Ed.),	  Annual	  Review	  of	  Psychology,	  56,	  315-­‐36.	  [PMID:	  15709938]	  

	  

	  

McPartland,	  J.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2006).	  Asperger’s	  Syndrome.	  Adolescent	  Medicine	  Clinic,	  17,	  771-­‐788.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

17030291]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2006).	  Autism	  and	  Asperger	  Syndrome:	  an	  overview.	  Brazilian	  Journal	  of	  Psychiatry	  (Revista	  	  

	  

	  

Brasileira	  de	  Psiquiatria),	  28	  (Supl	  I),	  S3-­‐11.	  [PMID:	  16791390]	  

	  

	  

Paul,	  R.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2006).	  Dissociations	  in	  the	  development	  of	  early	  		    

	  

	  

communication	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  In	  R.	  Paul	  (Ed.),	  Language	  Disorders	  from	  a	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Perspective:	  Essays	  in	  Honor	  of	  Robin	  S.	  Chapman	  (pp.	  163-­‐194).	  Mahwah,	  NJ:	  	  

	  

	  

Lawrence	  Erlbaum.	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 79 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	2  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.,	  &	  Cook,	  E.	  (2006).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  	  

	  

	  

In	  A.	  Martin	  &	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Lewis’s	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  Psychiatry:	  A	  Comprehensive	  	  

	  

	  

Textbook,	  4th	  edition	  (pp.384-­‐400).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Jones,	  W.	  (2007).	  Embodied	  psychoanalysis?	  Or	  on	  the	  confluence	  of	  psychodynamic	  	  	  

	  

	  

theory	  and	  developmental	  science.	  In	  L.	  Mayes,	  P.	  Fonagy,	  &	  M.	  Target	  (Eds.),	  Developmental	  	  

	  

	  

Science	  and	  Psychoanalysis:	  Integration	  and	  Innovation	  (pp.	  5-­‐38).	  London,	  United	  Kingdom:	  	  

	  

	  

Karnac	  Books.	  

	  

	  

Zwaigenbaum,	  L.,	  Thurm,	  A.,	  Stone,	  W.,	  Baranek,	  G.,	  Bryson,	  S.,	  Iverson,	  J.,	  Kau,	  A.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  	  

	  

	  

Lord,	  C.,	  Landa,	  R.	  Rogers,	  S.,	  &	  Sigman,	  M.	  (2007).	  Studying	  the	  emergence	  of	  autism	  spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

disorders	  in	  high-­‐risk	  infants:	  methodological	  and	  practical	  issues.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  37(3),	  466-­‐80.	  [PMID:	  16897376]	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Saulnier,	  C.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  (2008).	  Case	  studies	  of	  infants	  first	  evaluated	  in	  the	  	  

	  

	  

second	  year	  of	  life.	  In	  K.	  Chawarska,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Infants	  and	  Toddlers:	  Diagnosis,	  Assessment	  and	  Treatment	  (pp.141-­‐169).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  	  	  

	  

	  

Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  	  Autism	  spectrum	  disorders	  in	  infants	  and	  toddlers:	  an	  	  

	  

	  

introduction.	  In	  K.	  Chawarska,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  F.	  R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  in	  	  

	  

	  

Infants	  and	  Toddlers:	  Diagnosis,	  Assessment	  and	  Treatment	  (pp.1-­‐22).	  New	  York:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.R.	  (2008).	  	  Opportunities	  for	  research:	  concepts	  and	  future	  	  

	  

	  

directions.	  In	  K.	  Chawarska,	  A.	  Klin,	  &	  F.R.	  Volkmar	  (Eds.),	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  in	  Infants	  	  

	  

	  

and	  Toddlers:	  Diagnosis,	  Assessment	  and	  Treatment	  (pp.327-­‐336).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  	  

	  

	  

Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  Subtyping	  the	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  theoretical,	  research,	  and	  clinical	  	  

	  

	  

considerations.	  In	  S.	  Goldstein,	  J.	  Naglieri,	  &	  S.	  Ozonoff	  (Eds.),	  Assessment	  of	  Autism	  Spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders	  (pp.	  91-­‐116).	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2008).	  Altered	  salience	  in	  autism:	  developmental	  insights,	  consequences,	  and	  	  

	  

	  

questions.	  In	  E.	  McGregor,	  M.	  Nunez,	  K.	  Cebula,	  J.	  C.	  Gomez	  (Eds.),	  Autism:	  an	  Integrated	  View	  	  

	  

	  

from	  Neurocognitive,	  Clinical,	  and	  Intervention	  Research	  (pp.62-­‐82).	  Malden,	  MA:	  Blackwell	  	  

	  

	  

Publishing.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Schultz,	  R.	  T.,	  &	  State,	  M.	  (2009).	  The	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders.	  In	  	  

	  

	  

H.	  Kaplan	  &	  B.	  Sadock	  (Eds.),	  Comprehensive	  Textbook	  of	  Psychiatry,	  8th	  edition	  (pp.	  3540-­‐	  

	  

	  

3559).	  	  Philadelphia,	  PA:	  Lippincott	  Williams	  &	  Wilkins.	  	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  State,	  M.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2009).	  Autism	  and	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders:	  diagnostic	  issues	  for	  

	  

	  

the	  coming	  decade.	  The	  Journal	  of	  Child	  Psychology	  and	  Psychiatry,	  50(1-­‐2),	  108-­‐115.	  [PMID:	  	  

	  

	  

19220594]	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 80 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	3  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Koenig,	  K.,	  De	  Los	  Reyes,	  A.,	  Cicchetti,	  D.,	  Scahill,	  L.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2009).	  Group	  intervention	  to	  promote	  	  

	  

	  

social	  skills	  in	  school-­‐age	  children	  with	  pervasive	  developmental	  disorders:	  Reconsidering	  	  

	  

	  

efficacy.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  39(8),	  1163-­‐72.	  [PMID:	  19326199]	  

	  

	  

Zwaigenbaum,	  L.,	  Bryson,	  S.,	  Lord,	  C.,	  Rogers,	  S.,	  Carter,	  A.,	  Carver,	  L.,	  Chawarska,	  K.,	  Constantino,	  J.,	  	  

	  

	  

Dawson,	  G.,	  Dobkins,	  K.,	  Fein,	  D.,	  Iverson,	  J.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Landa,	  R.,	  Messinger,	  D.,	  Ozonoff,	  S.,	  	  

	  

	  

Sigman,	  M.,	  Stone,	  W.,	  Tager-­‐Flusberg,	  H.,	  &	  Yirmiya,	  N.	  (2009).	  Clinical	  assessment	  and	  	  	  

	  

	  

management	  of	  toddlers	  with	  suspected	  autism	  spectrum	  disorder:	  insights	  from	  studies	  of	  	  

	  

	  

high-­‐risk	  infants.	  Pediatrics,	  123(5),	  1383-­‐1391.	  [PMID:	  19403506]	  

	  

	  

VanBergeijk,	  E.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.R.	  (2010).	  What	  can	  help	  people	  with	  ASC	  find	  and	  keep	  	   	  

	  

	  

employment?	  In	  Bolte	  &	  Jallmayer	  (Eds.),	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Conditions	  (pp.	  239-­‐242).	  	   	  

	  

	  

Cambridge,	  MA:	  Hogrefe	  Publishing.	  

	  

	  

Cicchetti,	  D.	  V.,	  Koenig,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.	  (2011).	  From	  Bayes	  through	  

	  

	  

marginal	  utility	  to	  effect	  sizes:	  a	  guide	  to	  understanding	  the	  clinical	  and	  statistical	  significance	  	  

	  

	  

of	  autism	  research	  studies.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  and	  Developmental	  Disorders,	  41(2),	  168-­‐74.	  	  

	  

	  

[PMID:	  20490646]	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Saulnier,	  C.,	  Quirmbach,	  L.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (2011).	  Clinical	  evaluation	  of	  children	  with	  autism	  spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  E.	  Hollander,	  A.	  Kolevzon,	  &	  J.	  Coyle	  (Eds.),	  American	  Psychiatric	  Publishing	  Inc.	  	  

	  

	  

Textbook	  of	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  (pp.	  25-­‐38).	  Arlington,	  VA:	  American	  Psychiatric	  	   	  

	  

	  

Publishing,	  Inc.	  	   	  

	  

	  

McPartland,	  J.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  Westphal,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.R.	  (in	  press).	  The	  autism	  spectrum	  disorders.	  	  

	  

	  

In	  A.	  Tasman,	  J.	  Kay,	  J.	  Lieberman,	  M.	  First	  &	  M.	  Maj	  (Eds.),	  Psychiatry,	  3rd	  edition.	  New	  York,	  	  

	  

	  

NY:	  John	  Willey.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Shultz,	  R.T.	  	  (in	  press).	  Autism	  and	  the	  pervasive	  developmental	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  M.	  G.	  Gelder,	  J.	  J.	  López-­‐Ibor,	  &	  N.	  Andreasen	  (Eds.),	  New	  Oxford	  Texbook	  of	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry,	  2nd	  edition,	  Volume	  2.	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

	  

Saulnier,	  C.,	  Quirmbach,	  L.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (in	  press).	  Clinical	  evaluation	  of	  children	  with	  Autism	  Spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

Disorders.	  In	  C.	  Araújo,	  J.	  Perissinoto,	  &	  J.S.	  Schwartzman	  (Eds.),	  Autismo	  e	  outros	  transtornos	  	  

	  

	  

do	  espectro	  autista.	  	  São	  Paulo,	  Brazil:	  Editora	  Memnon.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  (in	  press).	  Asperger’s	  syndrome:	  from	  Asperger	  to	  modern	  day.	  In	  D.G.	  Amaral,	  G.	  Dawson,	  &	  	  

	  

	  

Geschwind,	  D.H.	  (Eds.),	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  (pp.	  44	  –	  59).	  Oxford,	  United	  Kingdom:	  	  

	  

	  

Oxford	  University	  Press.	  

	  

	  

Jones,	  W.,	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (in	  press).	  Social	  engagement	  in	  the	  first	  two	  years	  of	  life	  in	  autism	  spectrum	  	  

	  

	  

disorders.	  In	  M.	  Just	  &	  K.	  Pelphrey	  (Chair),	  Development	  and	  Brain	  Systems	  in	  Autism.	  	   	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 81 of 84

Ami	  Klin,	  PhD	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  

	  

	  

	  

	  Page	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  6	  	  	4  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	  	   	  	  

	  

	  

Symposium	  conducted	  at	  the	  meeting	  of	  Carnegie	  Mellon	  University,	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Psychology	  	  

	  

	  

Press.	  

	  

e.	   Books	  and	  Special	  Journal	  Issues:	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  &	  Sparrow,	  S.	  S.	  (Eds.).	  (2000).	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Guilford	  	  

	  

	  

Press.	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (Eds.)	  (2003).	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  Special	  issue	  of	  Child	  and	  Adolescent	  	  

	  

	  

Psychiatric	  Clinics	  of	  North	  America,	  12.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.,	  Paul,	  R.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Cohen,	  D.	  J.	  (Eds.).	  	  (2005).	  Handbook	  of	  Autism	  and	  Pervasive	  	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  3rd	  edition.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  Wiley	  &	  Sons.	  

	  

	  

Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  &	  Klin,	  A.	  (Eds.).	  (2005).	  Special	  issue	  on	  Asperger	  Syndrome.	  Journal	  of	  Autism	  	   	  

	  

	  

Developmental	  Disorders,	  35(2).	  

	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Baron-­‐Cohen,	  S.	  (Eds.).	  (2006).	  The	  cognitive	  neuroscience	  of	  Asperger	  syndrome.	  Brain	  	  

	  

	  

Cognition,	  61.	  	  

	  

	  

Klin,	  A.	  &	  Mercadante,	  M.	  T.	  (Eds.).	  (2006).	  Special	  supplement	  on	  autism.	  Brazilian	  Journal	  of	  	   	  

	  

	  

Psychiatry	  (Revista	  Brasileira	  de	  Psiquiatria),	  28	  (Supl	  I),	  S1-­‐2.	  [PMID:	  16791386]	  

	  

	  

Chawarska,	  K.,	  Klin,	  A.,	  &	  Volkmar,	  F.	  R.	  (Eds.).	  (2008).	  Autism	  Spectrum	  Disorders	  in	  Infants	  and	  	  

	  

	  

Toddlers:	  diagnosis,	  assessment	  and	  treatment.	  New	  York,	  NY:	  	  Guilford	  Press.	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 82 of 84
Legal	  consultations	  from	  January	  1	  2008	  through	  June	  8	  2012	   Ami	  Klin	  PhD	   	   	  
2008	   	   01.	   Beverly	  A.	  Sandacz	   Roetzel	  &	  Andress	   1375	  East	  Ninth	  Street	   One	  Cleveland	  Center,	  Ninth	  Floor	   Cleveland	  OH	  	  44114	   Tel.:	  216	  615	  4834	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   02.	  	   Mr.	  Curt	  J.	  Schiner	   Lester	  Schwab	  Katz	  &	  Dwyer,	  LLP	   120	  Broadway	   New	  York	  NY	  	  10271-­‐0071	   Tel.:	  (212)	  341-­‐4462	   e-­‐mail:	  cschiner@lskdnylaw.com	  	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   03.	  	   Guadalupe	  Ayala	   Mitigation	  Specialist,	  CLU	   State	  Appellate	  Public	  Defender	   State	  of	  Idaho,	  Office	  of	  the	  State	  Appellate	  Public	  Defender	   3647	  Lake	  Harbor	  Lane	   Boise	  ID	  	  83703	   Tel.:	  (208)	  334-­‐2712	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   04.	   Mr.	  Mark	  Sherman	   Sherman,	  Richichi	  &	  Hickey,	  LLC	   27	  Fifth	  Street	   Stamford	  CT	  	  06905-­‐5082	   Tel:	  203	  324	  2296	   Fax:	  203	  348	  7313	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 83 of 84
www.srh-­‐law.com	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   	  
2009	   	   05.	   Gregory	  K.J.	  Wells	   Shadoan,	  Michael	  &	  Wells,	  LLP	   Attorneys	  at	  Law	   108	  Park	  Avenue	   Rockville,	  Maryland	  20850	   Tel.:	  301-­‐762-­‐5150	   	   Consultation	  and	  deposition;	  no	  trial.	  	   	   06.	   Mr.	  Joseph	  J.	  Bottiglieri	  	   Bonner	  Kiernan	  Trebacho	  Crociata,	  LLP	   1233	  20th	  St.,	  NW	   Suite	  800	   Washington	  DC	  20036	   	   Consultation,	  deposition,	  and	  trial.	  	   	   07.	   Mr.	  Michael	  E.	  Reed	  and	  Ms.	  Erin	  M.	  Diaz	   Law	  Offices,	  Wicker,	  Smith,	  O’Hara,	  McCoy	  &	  Ford,	  P.A.	   100	  North	  Tampa	  Street,	  Suite	  3650	   P.O.Box	  2152	   Tampa,	  Florida	  33602	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   08.	   Attorney	  Stuart	  G.	  Glass	   Kimberly	  Davidson,	  Legal	  Assistant	   Lester	  Schwab	  Katz	  &	  Dwyer,	  LLP	   120	  Broadway	   New	  York	  NY	  10271-­‐0071	   Tel.:	  212-­‐964-­‐6611	   Fax:	  212-­‐267-­‐5916	   Tel.	  direct:	  212-­‐341-­‐4222	  

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 48-36 Filed 07/13/12 Page 84 of 84
e-­‐mail:	  kdavidson@lskdnylaw.com	  	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   	  
2010	   09.	   Kirsten	  R.	  Daniel	   Clerk:	  Sara	  B.	  Goodman	   Oldfather	  Law	  Firm	   Attorneys	  at	  Law	   1330	  South	  Third	  Street	   Louisville,	  Kentucky	  40208	   Tel.:	  (502)	  637	  7200	   Fax:	  (502)	  637	  3999	   www.oldfather.com	   	   Consultation	  only;	  no	  deposition	  or	  trial.	  	   	   	  

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents,

:

Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz,

individually, and on behalf of all others

:

similarly situated, et al.,

:

Plaintiffs,

:

v.

:

The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-cv-04027

Defendants.

:

Legrome D. Davis, J.

MEMORANDUM

February 19, 2013

I. BACKGROUND A. Statutory Framework of IDEA The crux of Plaintiffs’ case relates to alleged violations of the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1996). Before addressing the facts, it is helpful to understand the statutory framework of the IDEA. The IDEA seeks to provide all children with disabilities with “a free appropriate public education [“FAPE”] which emphasizes special education and related services to meet their unique needs.” 20 U.S.C. § 1400. To ensure that the disabled child receives an educational program tailored to his or her specific needs, the child’s parents, teacher, and a representative of the local education agency collaborate to design an “individualized education program” (“IEP”) for the child. 20 U.S.C. § 1414. Based on the child’s individual needs, the IEP sets forth the child’s educational level,

1

performance, and goals. After the IEP is drafted, the School District issues a Notice of Recommended Educational
Placement (“NOREP”),1 which contains a form to either approve or disapprove the IEP. The NOREP must include a description and explanation of the action taken by the school district and a disclosure that the child’s parents may challenge the school district’s decision. See § 1415(c). To ensure parents retain the opportunity to stay involved on decisions affecting their child’s IEP, the parents must also be provided with a NOREP whenever the school district “proposes to initiate or change” the “educational placement of the child.” 20 U.S.C. § 1415.
B. Factual Background and Procedural History This class action was initiated by parents of students with autism, who allege that the School District of Philadelphia (the “School District”) transfers autistic students in kindergarten through eighth grade (“K-8") without providing the level of parental notice and involvement required under state and federal law. Seeking systemic relief for the alleged violations, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, which we granted.2 In the 2011-2012 school year, 1,684 students in K-8 in the School District were identified as having autism (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 8), most of whom require access to an autistic support
1 NOREP is essentially the state version of “Prior Written Notice” under § 1415 of the IDEA. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at 12). The two phrases will be used interchangeably throughout this opinion.
2 The class is defined as: All children with autism in the School District of Philadelphia in grades kindergarten through eight (“K-8") who have been transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are at risk of being transferred, as a result of the School District’s upper-leveling process, the parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class. 2

classroom. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 21, at 55). Depending on the child’s age, he or she will be
placed into one of three autistic support classrooms based on “grade level”: kindergarten through
second grade (“K-2"), third grade through fifth grade (“3-5"), and sixth grade through eighth
grade (“6-8"). (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at ¶ 2). Although there are three different groups, a
school sometimes offers only one grade level of autistic support. When a student requiring
autism support completes the highest grade level provided in his or her current school, the School
District transfers that student to a different school where those services can continue to be provided.3 (See Doc. No. 49, Ex. L, at 43; Ex. G, at 104). This process is referred to as an “upper-level transfer” or “upper leveling.”4 (See Doc. No. 49, Ex. L, at 38; Doc. No. 51-1, at ¶
10; Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at ¶¶ 14-16).
The building assignment decision is not made by a student’s IEP team and parents are
generally not involved in the process. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 21, at 57; Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at ¶
23; Doc. No. 54, at ¶ 25). Rather, the building assignment is determined “pretty much
unilaterally” by the School District’s division directors. (Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at ¶ 23; see also
Doc. No. 49, Ex. L, at 55). To make the determination, the directors first consider the number of
3 For example, a student may be in a K-2 program, but the school does not have a 3-5 program. Once that student reaches the end of his K-2 program, he would be transferred to a different school in the district that has a 3-5 program. In contrast, a non-disabled student attending a K-5 school generally continues at that school for all six grade levels unless she moves or is transferred for disciplinary reasons.
4 “Upper-leveling” does not seem to be limited to the transfer of students with autism. Rather, it seems to refer more generally to the transfer of any student, including non-disabled students, that reach the end of their age-limit grade. (See Doc. No. 49, Ex. M, at 38; Doc. No. 54, Ex. 8, at 38). However, for purposes of this Memorandum, “upper-leveling” refers strictly to the transfer of children with autism to different schools within the School District when they reach the end of their age-limit grade.
3

students coming to the School District known to require services in an autistic support program, as well as building locations with available space for autistic support classrooms. The directors then consider each student’s IEP and “place[] each student with autism in the school that [they feel] will best meet that student’s needs.” (Doc. No. 51, Ex. 20, at ¶ 8).
The School District concedes that it provides parents with no written notice prior to the building assignment decision. Rather, the School District generally does not advise parents that their child will be transferred until after the decision concerning the transfer has been made. (See Doc. No. 54-1, at ¶ 31). The first notification to the student’s parents about their child’s transfer comes from the student’s school, and is usually issued in late spring. There is no formal procedure for the initial notification; parents may be informed of the transfer through a meeting, phone call, or simply an email. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 21, at 66-67). A few weeks later, the division directors send a “follow up” letter to “ensure that the parent is informed.” (Id.).
Although the School District eventually notifies parents that their child will be transferred, it admits that is has no formal policy governing the adequateness of that notification. (See Doc. No. 54-1, at ¶ 36). The discovery materials provided by Plaintiffs reflect that the notification given to parents about the transfer of their autistic child is often terse, at best. In one instance, for example, a student with autism was sent home with only a “strip” of paper, stating that the child would be attending a different school the following year. The strip of paper did not include the location of the student’s new school, of which the parents were not informed until only a few weeks before the new school year. (See Doc. No. 51-1, Ex. 22; Ex. 32, at 50-53; see also Doc. No. 51-1, at ¶ 40; Doc. No. 54-1, at ¶ 40).
In another instance, the mother of an autistic child received only an oral comment from
4

her child’s teacher, telling her that her child might be transferred from Richmond Elementary to another school in the fall. Despite receiving no formal or written notice about the possibility of a transfer for her child, the mother began receiving transportation letters, indicating that her child would be attending Feltonville Elementary School that fall. When the school year started, however, the child’s mother was informed through a secretary that her son would actually remain at Richmond. (See Doc. No. 51-1, Ex. 31, at 583-84; see also Doc. No. 51-1, at ¶ 39; Doc. No. 41, at ¶ 39). Plaintiffs present additional evidence, reflecting similar scenarios.5
Plaintiffs now bring this class action lawsuit against the School District of Philadelphia, seeking systemic relief from the allegedly unlawful process of “upper leveling.” Throughout this litigation process, the declaratory and prospective injunctive relief sought by Plaintiffs has seemingly varied between the Complaint and subsequent motions. On a very broad scale, Plaintiffs ask this Court to order the School District to completely discontinue the upper-leveling transfer process, and require “that any school which contains an autism support classroom shall offer autism programming for the same years that the school provides programming for children who are not disabled.” (Doc. No. 1, at 21-22; see also Doc. No. 48, at 1-2). Short of eliminating the upper-leveling process in its entirety, Plaintiffs seek this Court to order the School District to provide for a level of parental notice and involvement prior to the transfer decision that is consistent with the requirements set forth by state and federal education law. (See Doc. No. 1, at 8; Doc. No. 17, at 2l Doc. No. 48, at 2). To obtain that level of parental involvement, Plaintiffs
5 See, e.g., Doc. No. 61, Ex. 39 (An internal School District email states: “I received a call from the parent of an [autistic support] student . . . he is part of the upper level process . . . no one sent the father a letter stating where his son will attend in September . . . shall we send him a letter . . . please advise.” As of July 27, 2010, the response indicated that the “[transfer] letters had not gone out yet.”).
5

maintain that the School District must publicly disseminate a list of all the schools within the School District that house any autistic support classroom. (See Doc. No. 1, at 21; Doc. No. 17, at 2; Doc. No. 48, at 2).
Plaintiffs emphasize that they cannot obtain this structural relief through an administrative hearing, so judicial intervention is necessary. Specifically, Brian Jason Ford, the hearing officer presiding over P.V.’s and M.M.’s (two of the four named plaintiffs) administrative hearings, concluded that “the District violated the Parent’s right to participation by reassigning the Student [P.V. and M.M.] to a different school building without sending IDEAcompliant prior written notice.” (Doc. No. 51, Ex. 3, at 15; Ex. 4, at 16). Ford noted, however, that he “lacks authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures,” so he merely encouraged the School District “to alter its procedures on a broader scope, if only to avoid a plethora of identical claims from similarly situated students.” (Id.).
Plaintiffs bring this class action seeking systemic relief from the School District’s process of upper-leveling children with autism. In the first two counts of the Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that the process of upper-leveling violates the Individual and Disabilities Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (“IDEA”) and Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code (“Chapter 14"), “as it occurs with little or no parental notice or involvement, without required consideration of children’s individualized circumstances, and in direct violation of the mandated individual planning process of the IDEA.” In the other two counts, Plaintiffs contend that upper-leveling violates § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“§ 504"), and Title II of the American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), because the transfer “is based solely on the fact that children have autism.” (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 2). Both parties have filed motions for summary judgment, which are now ripe for disposition.
6

II. LEGAL ANALYSIS A. Standard of Review 1. Summary Judgment Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a), we must “grant summary judgment if the
movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Summary judgment is appropriate where “the nonmoving party has failed to make a sufficient showing on an essential element of her case with respect to which she has the burden of proof.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). Accordingly, the nonmoving party cannot avoid summary judgment “merely by restating the allegations of his complaint, but must point to concrete evidence in the record that supports each and every essential element of his case.” Orsatti v. New Jersey State Police, 71 F.3d 480, 484 (3d Cir. 1995) (citing Celotex, 477 U.S. at 322). “The mere existence of a scintilla of evidence in support of the [non-movant]’s position will be insufficient; there must be evidence on which the jury could reasonably find for the [non-movant].” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 252 (1986). Where, as here, the parties file cross-motions for summary judgment, the Court “construes facts and draws inferences in favor of the party against whom the motion under consideration is made." Pichler v. UNITE, 542 F.3d 380, 386 (3d Cir. 2008) (quotation omitted).
2. Review of Administrative Record The Third Circuit makes clear that a district court must review an IDEA decision by a state administrative agency under a “modified” de novo standard. L.E. v. Ramsey Bd. of Educ., 435 F.3d 384, 389 (3d Cir. 2006). Under this modified standard, we must afford “due weight” to the factual findings from the administrative proceedings, and consider those facts “prima facie”
7

correct. See id., S.H. v. State-Operated School Dist. of City of Newark, 336 F.3d 260, 270 (3d Cir. 2003). The District Court may, as the case here, consider evidence in addition to the factual record developed at the administrative level. “[W]here the District Court hears additional evidence it is ‘free to accept or reject the agency findings depending on whether those findings are supported by the new, expanded record and whether they are consistent with the requirements of the [IDEA].’” Id. (quoting Oberti v. Bd. of Educ. of the Borough of the Clementon Sch. Dist., 995 F.2d 1204, 1220 (3d Cir. 1993)).
Notably, the “due weight” given to the factual findings from the administrative proceedings is “‘not implicated with respect to the issues of law, such as the proper interpretation of the [IDEA] and its requirements,’ that is, the district court owes no deference to conclusions of law drawn by a state or local educational agency.” In re: Educational Assignment of Joseph R., 318 Fed. Appx. 113, 118 (3d Cir. 2009) (non-precedential) (quoting Lillbask ex rel. Mauclaire v. Conn. Dep’t of Educ., 397 F.3d 77, 82 (2d Cir. 2005)).
B. Standing The three “irreducible” constitutional elements of standing are: (1) an injury in fact that is actual or imminent, not “conjectural” or “hypothetical”; (2) a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of – the injury must be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant; and (3) a showing that it is likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable decision will redress the injury. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 56061 (1992). Plaintiffs need not demonstrate actual harm or monetary damages to establish standing. On the contrary, “the actual or threatened injury required by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing.” Alston v.
8

Countrywide Fin. Corp., 585 F.3d 753, 763 (3d Cir. 2009). Here, Defendants once again contend that Plaintiffs lack standing because they were
never physically transferred pursuant to the District’s upper-leveling process, and therefore, have suffered no “injury in fact.” Defendants raised this same argument at the motion to dismiss level, which we rejected. We explained that:
Even though Plaintiffs currently attend their preferred school, Plaintiffs will continue to be subject to the District’s allegedly IDEA-deficient educational placement process from year to year. As such, Plaintiffs’ injuries are imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical, and a favorable court decision will likely redress the systemic failures, if any, in the District’s practices regarding the educational placement and transfer of autistic students. Therefore, under Lujan, Plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims. P.V. v. Sch. Dist. of Phila., No. 2:11-cv-04027, 2011 WL 5127850, at *11 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2011). Defendants further argue that Plaintiffs provide no evidence of “any student whose academic or behavioral progress has ever been adversely affected by transfer.” (Def.’s Mot. for Sum. Judgment, at 12). Regardless, Defendants fail to realize that the crux of Plaintiff’s IDEA claim stems from the School District’s lack of parental involvement leading up to the transfer decision of their student. As we discuss infra, Plaintiffs do provide evidence that the School District provides almost no parental involvement or notice prior to the transfer decisions, which Plaintiffs allege is a violation of the IDEA. For all the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs have standing under Lujan to pursue their claims.
9

C. IDEA & Chapter 146 Courts generally conduct a two-step inquiry to determine whether a school district complied with the IDEA. First, courts determine whether the school district complied with the procedural safeguards set forth by the IDEA and state law. Second, the court evaluates whether the IEP is reasonably calculated to enable the child to receive educational benefit. D.S. v. Bayonne Bd. of Educ., 602 F.3d 553, 565 (3d Cir. 2010). However, the second step is unnecessary if the violation of the IDEA’s procedure “results in a loss of educational opportunity for the student, seriously deprives parents of their participation rights, or causes a deprivation of educational benefits.” Id. Accordingly, our inquiry begins with whether the School District violated any procedural safeguards under the IDEA.
1. The Meaning of “Educational Placement” Under the IDEA Both parties recognize that under the procedural safeguards of the IDEA, the School District must provide for meaningful parental participation and prior written notice whenever it initiates or proposes to change the “educational placement” of a child.7 Plaintiffs allege that the School District’s process of upper-leveling autistic students violates the IDEA’s procedural safeguards because it changes an autistic student’s educational placement without notifying
6 Chapter 14 reflects Pennsylvania’s compliance with the IDEA requirements, and incorporates federal IDEA regulations. 22 Pa. Code § 14.102.
7 See 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(1),(3) (stating that there must be “[a]n opportunity for the parents of a child with a disability . . . to participate in meetings with respect to the . . . educational placement of the child . . .” and provision of “[w]ritten prior notice to the parents of the child, in accordance with subsection (c)(1), whenever the local educational agency proposes to initiate or change . . . the . . . educational placement of the child . . .”); see also 20 U.S.C. § 1414(e) (requiring “that the parents of each child with a disability are members of any group that makes decisions on the educational placement of their child”).
10

parents prior to the decision and also precludes parents from participating in the transfer decision. The School District contends that there is no legal requirement to involve parents in the transfer decision because upper-leveling does not change a student’s educational placement.
Specifically, Defendants argue that “educational placement” refers only to “educational programming and services – not the location at which a student receives educational programming and services.” (Doc. No. 54, at 7). Because there is no proof or claim that the programming and services provided at different schools within the district vary in any relevant respect, Defendants contend that upper-leveling is simply changing the physical location of where an autistic student receives his IEP. Thus, this Court must resolve whether transferring students with autism to a different a school building within the same school district constitutes a change in “educational placement” for purposes of requiring parental involvement under the IDEA.
Unfortunately, neither the text nor legislative history of the IDEA defines the term “educational placement.” The Third Circuit has stated, however, that “given the remedial purposes of the [IDEA], the term . . . should be given an expansive reading.” DeLeon v. Susquehanna Cmty. School Dist., 747 F.2d 149, 153 (3d Cir. 1984). The touchstone of whether a modification in a child’s school day should be considered a change in his or her educational placement is “whether the decision is likely to affect in some significant way the child’s learning experience.” Id. Thus, “[t]he question of what constitutes a change in educational placement is, necessarily, fact specific.” Id. at 153.
“As a general matter, the location of the services is not conclusive in determining what
11

constitutes the educational placement of the student.” George A. v. Wallingford Swarthmore School Dist., 655 F. Supp. 2d 546, 550 (E.D. Pa. Sep. 3, 2009). However, “[location] cannot be entirely divorced from the inquiry.” Id. For instance, courts in the Third Circuit have recognized that distance between classrooms, available facilities, or a student’s history at a particular school are relevant to the determination of educational placement. See, e.g., R.B. v. Mastery Charter School, 762 F. Supp. 2d 745, 763 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 29, 2010); George A., 655 F. Supp. 2d at 551. Thus, “[t]he meaning of ‘educational placement’ falls somewhere between the physical school attended by a child and the abstract goals of a child’s IEP.” R.B., 762 F. Supp. 2d at 763 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted).
To support its contention that upper-leveling is not a change in an autistic student’s educational placement, the School District relies on In re Educ. Assignment of Joseph R., 318 Fed. Appx. 113 (3d Cir. 2009). Even in this non-precedential opinion, the Third Circuit recognizes that determining what constitutes a change in educational placement is a factintensive inquiry. Based on the facts before it, the court in Joseph R., held that relocating a student with learning disabilities from a resource classroom to an inclusion classroom within the same building did not amount to a “change in educational placement” under the IDEA. In Joseph R., plaintiffs provided no evidence that the move to an inclusion room would likely affect the student’s learning experience in any significant way. The student received the same educational services on a daily basis, with the same special education teacher, but in a different room in the building.
While seemingly similar to Joseph R. at first glance, the facts in this case are materially
12

distinguishable and warrant different considerations. Unlike Joseph R., upper-leveling does not involve moving a child to a new classroom within the same school; rather, it relocates a child to an entirely novice infrastructure. Unlike an intra-school transition, as was the case in Joseph R., a transfer to a different school building often requires a longer commute on the bus, separation from former classmates, and acclimation to an unfamiliar environment. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 16, at 195).
The physical adjustments accompanied by an upper-level transfer are significant because of another major factual distinction: the students being transferred in this case have autism. In Joseph R., there was no indication that because the student had a learning disability, a change in his physical location may affect his learning experience. In contrast, an unplanned transition for children with autism is likely to affect their learning rate and learning sequences. (See Doc. No. 49, Ex. Q, at 31). This is because difficulty with transition is one of the defining characteristics of children with autism. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 1, at 4). Thus, despite the School District’s contention to the contrary, upper-leveling students with autism does not merely change their physical surroundings; the transition is likely to have a significant impact on their learning experience. Accordingly, we must conclude that under the particular facts of our case, upperleveling students with autism to a separate school building in the School District constitutes a change in their “educational placement” under the IDEA.
The cases outside of the Third Circuit to which the School District cites do not suggest a different outcome. From the number of out-of-circuit appellate decisions purported to support its contention, the School District lists only one that involves a student with autism: T.Y. v. N.Y.
13

City Department of Education, 584 F.3d 412 (2d Cir. 2009). The Third Circuit has never adopted T.Y., and regardless, its holding is not contrary to our conclusion. The court in T.Y., “simply [held] that an IEP's failure to identify a specific school location will not constitute a
per procedural violation of the IDEA.” Id. at 420. Notably, the parents in T.Y. participated in se selecting the school for their child prior to the final assignment and “worked cooperatively” with the school district in arriving at the decision. Therefore, the School District’s reliance on T.Y., in this case is misplaced.
The only factually analogous case that the School District cites is an unreported opinion that stems from the Middle District of Florida. In L.M. v. Pinellas County School Board, the district court found that the transfer of a student with autism from one school to another in the district “does not amount to a change in her educational placement within the meaning of the stay-put provision.” No. 10-539, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46796, at *5 (M.D. Fla. April 11, 2010). In reaching its conclusion, the short opinion relied upon cases outside the Third Circuit, and gave short shrift to the role of transition for children with autism. Thus, beyond its nonbinding effect in the Third Circuit, the L.M. opinion is simply not persuasive.
3. Parental Participation and Prior Written Notice Requirements Because we conclude that upper-leveling constitutes a change in “educational placement” for students with autism, we must now determine whether the School District’s current level of parental participation and prior written notice suffices under the procedural safeguards of the IDEA. The School District concedes it does not permit the students’ parents to participate in the transfer decisions on any meaningful level. Instead, parents learn of the new building assignment
14

only after it has been unilaterally decided upon by division directors, with no opportunity for parents to contribute to the discussion. The notification is sometimes no more than one sentence on a strip of paper, informing the parent that their child will be attending a different school in the fall.
Moreover, the notification is generally sent only weeks prior to the start of the next school year, leaving parents minimal time to plan for their autistic child’s transition from one educational setting to another. Such terse notification falls short of the IDEA’s procedural safeguards, which require, among other things, a written explanation of why the transfer is proposed, what other options were considered, and why those other options were rejected. See § 1415(c). We therefore conclude that the School District’s process of upper-leveling children with autism violates the procedural safeguards under the IDEA, and “seriously deprives” parents the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process regarding the educational placement of their autistic child. Accordingly, the School District is ordered to alter its upper-leveling process for children with autism to provide prior written notice and a level of parental participation that complies with the procedural requirements under the IDEA.8
We emphasize that the School District retains “‘significant authority to select the school site, as long as it is educationally appropriate.’” Lebron v. North Penn School Dist., 769 F. Supp. 2d 788, 800 (E.D. Pa. Feb. 14, 2011) (quoting White ex rel. v. Ascension Parish Sch. Bd., 343
8 Because we conclude that the School District’s violation of the IDEA’s procedural safeguards seriously deprives parents of their participation rights, we need not address Plaintiffs’ claim that upper-leveling fails to comport with IEP requirements.
15

F.3d 373, 382 (2003).9 By no means does our holding suggest that parents of children with autism are entitled to any type of “veto power” over the final location decision. We simply conclude that under the IDEA, the School District cannot categorically deny parents the opportunity to provide input and receive notice about the educational placement of their autistic child.
E. ADA & § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In addition to alleging violations of the IDEA and Chapter 14, Plaintiffs also contend that the School District’s process of upper-leveling violates the ADA and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Unlike their IDEA claim, however, Plaintiffs seem not to allege that the violation stems from a lack of parental participation or prior notice. Rather, Plaintiffs argue that transferring autistic students at a grade earlier than non-disabled children constitutes discrimination and an unreasonable accommodation in violation of the ADA and § 504. (See Doc. No. 51, at 23). To establish a violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act,10 Plaintiffs must prove that (1) they are disabled; (2) they are “otherwise qualified” to participate in school activities; (3) the School District received federal financial assistance; and (4) they were excluded from
9 For that reason, we refuse to force the School District to provide parents a list of the building locations of autistic support classrooms. Beyond conclusory allegations, Plaintiffs provide no evidence that such a list is necessary to effectuate the School District’s compliance with the procedural requirements of the IDEA.
10 The elements of a claim under the ADA and § 504 are nearly identical. The only difference is that § 504 also requires the entity against whom the violation is alleged to receive federal assistance. See Muhammad v. Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny Cnty., Pa, 483 Fed. Appx. 759, 762-763 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing Helen L. v. DiDario, 46 F.3d 325, 330 n.7 (3d Cir. 1995)).
16

participation in, denied the benefits of, or subject to discrimination by the School District. Ridley School Dist. v. M.R. 680 F.3d 260, 280 (3d Cir. 2012) (citing Ridgewood Bd. of Educ. v. N.E. ex rel. M.E., 172 F.3d 238, 253 (3d Cir. 1999)). The parties do not dispute the first three elements. (See Doc. No. 49, at 37). Rather, the only issue is whether Plaintiffs were denied the benefit of an education program or were subject to discrimination by the School District.
Plaintiffs allege that the School District’s upper-leveling policy creates an inference of discrimination. (See Doc. No. 62, at 23). Courts in the Third Circuit have observed that for purposes of ADA and § 504, discrimination can be inferred from a school district’s “deliberate indifference” toward its students with disabilities. See, e.g., Chambers v. School Dist. of Philadelphia Bd. of Educ., 827 F. Supp. 2d 409, 425 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 24, 2011); Adam C. v. Scranton Sch. Dist., No. 3:07-cv-532, 2011 WL 4072756, at *5-6 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 13, 2011). Here, Plaintiffs contend that the School District is deliberately indifferent to students with autism because it will “knowingly upper-level transfer students without regard to their individual needs.” (Doc.No. 64, at 12). The record makes clear, however, that the School District does not make any transfer decisions until taking into account each student’s individualized education plan. (See Doc. No. 51, Ex. 19, at 8). Moreover, the School District ensures that the student is transferred to the appropriate school building nearest to his or her home. (See Doc. No. 54, Ex. 8, at 72). Despite the lack of parental involvement in these decisions, there is no indication that the School District knew about the accommodations required for students with autism and chose deliberately to ignore them. To the contrary, the School District upper-levels students with autism in order to provide them with adequate accommodations.
17

Plaintiffs also contend that transferring students with autism to different schools within the district is not a reasonable accommodation under the ADA and § 504. Plaintiffs argue that this Court should require the School District to “ensure that any [K-8] school which contains an autism support classroom shall offer autism programming for the same years that the school provides programming for children who are disabled.” (Doc. No. 1, at 22).
Under § 504, a “school district must reasonably accommodate the needs of the handicapped child so as to ensure meaningful participation in educational activities and meaningful access to educational benefits.” Ridley School Dist. v. M.R. 680 F.3d 260, 280 (3d Cir. 2012) (citations omitted). “However, § 504 does not mandate ‘substantial’ changes to the school's programs, and courts should be mindful of the need to strike a balance between the rights of the student and h[er] parents and the legitimate financial and administrative concerns of the [s]chool [d]istrict.” Id., at 180-81 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Here, presumably due to financial and administrative concerns, the School District does not provide autistic support in every grade level at every school in the District. As a result, the School District must sometimes transfer a student with autism to a different school to ensure that he or she receives the services and programs set forth in his or her IEP in an age-appropriate setting. As we discussed at length earlier, such a transition is likely to affect the educational experience of a child with autism. Beyond that, however, Plaintiffs provide no proof that the services received by a transferred student with autism are deficient, so as to prevent that student from gaining a meaningful access to educational benefits. Compare Adam C., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 102981. To the contrary, the students are transferred to ensure they continue to receive
18

adequate services pursuant to their IEP. For that reason, we cannot find that transferring students with autism to ensure they receive their IEP in an age-appropriate setting is an unreasonable accommodation under the ADA or § 504. III. CONCLUSION
First, we conclude that Plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims. Second, we conclude that the School District’s process of upper-leveling children with autism violates the procedural safeguards under the IDEA, and seriously deprives parents the opportunity to participate in the decision-making process regarding the educational placement of their autistic child. Third, we conclude that the School District’s process of upper-leveling children with autism does not violate the ADA or § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 51) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Similarly, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 49) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. An appropriate Order follows this Memorandum.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.
19

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents,

:

Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz,

:

individually, and on behalf of all others

:

similarly situated, et al.,

:

:

Plaintiffs,

:

:

v.

:

:

The School District of Philadelphia, et al.

:

:

Defendants.

:

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-cv-04027

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of February 2013, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 49), Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 51), Defendants’ Response to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 54), Plaintiffs’ Response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 62), Defendants’ Reply Brief in Further Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 63), Plaintiffs’ Reply Brief in Further Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 64), Defendants’ Surreply in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 67), Plaintiffs’ Supplemental Memorandum (Doc. No. 69), and all exhibits attached thereto, it is hereby ORDERED as follows:

1. Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 49) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

2. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 51) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

3. Accordingly, the Philadelphia School District is ORDERED to alter its upper-leveling process for students with autism such that it provides class members with prior written notice and a level of parental participation consistent with the procedural requirements of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (1996).

4. No claims remain in this matter. Accordingly, the Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter for statistical purposes. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.

 
 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents,

:

Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz,

individually, and on behalf of all others

:

similarly situated, et al.,

:

Plaintiffs,

:

v.

:

The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-cv-04027

Defendants.

:

MEMORANDUM

Legrome D. Davis, J.

February 19, 2013

This lawsuit concerns the School District of Philadelphia’s (the “School District”)

treatment of, and policies governing, school children with autism. The four (4) named plaintiffs

in the purported class action lawsuit, P.V., M.M., J.V., and R.S.,1 are all autistic students at

Richmond Elementary School, a Kindergarten through Grade 5 (“K-5") school in the

Philadelphia School District (the “School District”). (Doc. No. 1, at ¶¶ 15-18). Plaintiffs

contend that the School District transfers students with autism automatically from one school to

another, simply because they complete a certain grade, more frequently than the School District

transfers non-disabled students who therefore, unlike autistic children, enjoy continued,

1 Because the four named plaintiffs are all minors, this lawsuit was brought by and through their parents. Specifically, P.V. by and through his parents Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz; M.M. by and through his parent Carla Murphy; J.V. by and through his parents Sharon Vargas and Ismael Vargas; and R.S. by and through his parents Heather Sanasac and Matthew Sanasac.
1

uninterrupted attendance in K-5 schools or K-8 schools. (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 1). Plaintiffs further allege that the decision-making process leading up to the transfer of an autistic student is conducted with little to no parental notice or involvement, and without the required consideration of the children’s individualized circumstances. (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 2). Plaintiffs contend that this is particularly problematic because children with autism have difficulty transitioning from one environment to another. (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 1).
Claiming that the School District’s policy of transferring autistic students violates several statutes, the four (4) plaintiffs filed suit against the School District; the School Reform Commission; Arlene Ackerman, Superintendent of the School District of Philadelphia, in her official capacity; and Linda Williams, Interim Deputy Chief of Special Education for the School District of Philadelphia, in her official capacity (collectively, “Defendants”). Seeking systemic relief from the allegedly unlawful transfer policy, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, which is now ripe for disposition. I. FACTS
Because we write primarily for the parties involved, we discuss only the facts relevant to resolving the instant motion. Unless stated otherwise, the following facts are not in dispute. In the 2011-2012 school year, over 1600 students in K-8 in the School District were identified as having autism. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 28; Doc. No. 50, Ex. 11; see also Doc. No. 48, Ex. 18, at 36). The School District provides autism support classrooms for these children, which are generally divided into three “grade levels” based on age: kindergarten through second grade (“K2"), third grade through fifth grade (“3-5"), and sixth grade through eighth grade (“6-8"). (See Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 36; Doc. No. 50, at 3). Although there are three different grade levels, a school
2

sometimes offers only one grade level of autism support. When a student requiring autism support completes the highest grade level provided in his or her current school, the School District transfers that student to a different school where those services can continue to be provided.2 (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 21, at 43; Doc. No. 50, at 5). This process is referred to as an “upper-level transfer” or “upper-leveling.” (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 21, at 37-39, 42-43; Doc. No. 50, Ex. 13, at 37-38).
The building assignment decision is not made by a student’s Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) team and parents are generally not involved in the process. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 2, at 3, ¶ 2; Doc. No. 50, at 5). Rather, the building assignment is determined predominantly by the School District’s division directors. (Doc. No. 48, Ex. 2, at 6; Ex. 3, see also Doc. No. 50, Ex. 12, at 55). To make that determination, the directors first consider the number of students coming to the School District known to require services in an autism support program, as well as building locations with available space for autism support classrooms. The directors then consider each student’s IEP and “place[] each student with autism in the school that [they feel] will best meet that student’s needs.” (Doc. No. 50, Ex. 16, at ¶ 8).
The School District concedes that it provides parents with no written notice prior to the building assignment decision. Rather, the School District generally does not advise parents that their child will be transferred until after the decision concerning the transfer has been made. (See
2 For example, a student may be in a K-2 autism support program, but the school does not offer a 3-5 program. Once that student reaches the end of his K-2 program, he would be transferred to a different school in the district that has a 3-5 program. In contrast, non-disabled students attending a K-5 school usually continue at that school for all six grade levels unless the family moves, the family requests the transfer, or for disciplinary reasons. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 2, at 5).
3

Doc. No. 50, Ex. 16, at 10). The first notification to the student’s parents about their child’s transfer comes from the student’s school, and is usually issued in late spring. There is no formal procedure for the initial notification; parents may be informed of the transfer through a meeting, phone call, or simply an email. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 21, at 66-67). A few weeks later, the division directors send a “follow up” letter to “ensure that the parent is informed.” (Id.). Although the School District eventually notifies parents that their child will be transferred, it admits that is has no formal policy governing the adequateness of that notification. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 21, at 72-75; Ex. 23, at 86-87).
Plaintiffs allege that the experiences of the named plaintiffs illustrate the inadequacies of the School District’s process of upper-leveling students with autism in grades K-8. For instance, P.V. is a student with autism who attends Richmond Elementary School. At the end of the 200910 school year, when P.V. was finishing second grade, Richmond offered only K-2 autism support in its building. Accordingly, the School District planned to transfer P.V. to another school when he finished second grade. At the end of the school year, P.V.’s mother received only a verbal warning from P.V.’s teacher that P.V. might be transferred from Richmond Elementary to another school in the fall. (Doc. No. 48, Ex. 11, at 583-84). Despite receiving no formal or written notice about the possibility of a transfer for her child, P.V.’s mother began receiving transportation letters over the summer, indicating that P.V. would be attending Feltonville Elementary School that fall. (Id.). When the school year started, however, P.V.’s mother was informed through a secretary that P.V. would in fact remain at Richmond. (Id.).
Like P.V., M.M. is a student with autism who attends Richmond Elementary School. On or around June 15, 2010, the School District advised M.M.’s mother via M.M.’s home-school
4

notebook that M.M. could no longer remain at Richmond for his third grade year during the 2010-11 school year. The note did not indicate to what school M.M. would be transferred. (See Doc. No. 48, Ex. 8, at 623-25). Throughout the summer of 2010, M.M.’s mother received no other information on the potential transfer until a few weeks prior to the start of the school year, and only after she contacted the School District directly.3 (See id. at 625-26).
Uncertain about where their children would be attending school that fall, the parents of P.V. and the parents of M.M. both filed for an administrative hearing in 2010, challenging, among other things, the School District’s upper-leveling process. (See Doc. No. 48, Exs. 1 and 2). In a consolidated ruling, the hearing officer, Brian Jason Ford, concluded that “the District violated the Parent’s right to participation by reassigning the Student [P.V. and M.M.] to a different school building without sending IDEA-compliant prior written notice.” (Doc. No. 48, Exs. 1 and 2, at 15). Ford noted, however, that he “lacks authority to order wholesale changes to the District’s procedures,” so he merely encouraged the School District “to alter its procedures on a broader scope, if only to avoid a plethora of identical claims from similarly situated students.”
3 Evidence produced during discovery suggests that absent class members have shared similar experiences with respect to notification and parental involvement throughout the upperleveling decision-making process. (See, e.g., Doc. No. 48, Ex. 16; Ex. 20, at 50-53 (student with autism sent home with only a “strip” of paper, stating that the child would be attending a different school the following year, but no indication as to the location of the student’s new school, of which the parents were not informed until only a few weeks before the new school year); Doc. No. 61, Ex. 39 (An internal School District email states: “I received a call from the parent of an [autistic support] student . . . he is part of the upper level process . . . no one sent the father a letter stating where his son will attend in September . . . shall we send him a letter . . . please advise.” As of July 27, 2010, the response indicated that the “[transfer] letters had not gone out yet.”); see also Doc. No. 61, at 8-9).
5

(Id.). 4 Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit seeking systemic relief from the School District’s allegedly
unlawful policy of upper-leveling children with autism.5 Plaintiffs emphasize that because they cannot obtain structural relief through an administrative hearing, judicial intervention and class action certification are necessary. The injunctive relief specifically sought by Plaintiffs has somewhat varied throughout their Complaint and subsequent motions. On a very broad scale, Plaintiffs ask this Court to order the School District to completely discontinue the upper-leveling transfer process, and require “that any school which contains an autism support classroom shall offer autism programming for the same years that the school provides programming for children who are not disabled.” (Doc. No. 1, at 21-22; see also Doc. No. 48, at 1-2). Short of eliminating the upper-leveling process in its entirety, Plaintiffs seek this Court to order the School District to provide for a level of parental notice and involvement prior to the transfer decision that is consistent with the requirements set forth by state and federal education law. (See Doc. No. 1, at 8; Doc. No. 17, at 2l Doc. No. 48, at 2). To obtain that level of parental involvement, Plaintiffs maintain that the School District must publicly disseminate a list of all the schools within the School District that house any autism support classroom. (See Doc. No. 1, at 21; Doc. No. 17, at
4 Plaintiffs J.V. and R.S. had similar experiences. The School District attempted to upper-level J.V. and R.S. – who both have autism and attend Richmond Elementary – after the second grade without issuing prior written notice or providing their parents with any meaningful level of participation in the decision-making process. According to Plaintiffs, J.V. and R.S. prevented their transfer from Richmond only after they each filed a due process complaint. (See Doc. No. 1, at ¶¶ 17-18; Doc. No. 48, at 11; Ex. 3, at 4; Ex. 14).
5 Other than a demand for costs and attorney’s fees, Plaintiffs seek solely injunctive and declaratory relief. Plaintiffs do not seek compensatory education or compensatory damages. (See Doc. No. 1, at 21-23).
6

2; Doc. No. 48, at 2). The relief sought by Plaintiffs is based upon the violation of four separate statutes.
Specifically, Plaintiffs allege that the process of upper-leveling violates the Individual and Disabilities Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (“IDEA”) and Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code (“Chapter 14"), “as it occurs with little or no parental notice or involvement, without required consideration of children’s individualized circumstances, and in direct violation of the mandated individual planning process of the IDEA.” (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 2; see also ¶ 56 (citing U.S.C. § 1414(d) and § 1415)). Plaintiffs contend that upper-leveling also violates § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“§ 504"), and Title II of the American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), because the transfer “is based solely on the fact that children have autism.” (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 2).
Plaintiffs bring this instant motion, seeking class action certification. Specifically, Plaintiffs seek to certify a class consisting of students with autism in grade levels K-8 in the School District who have been transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are subject to being transferred pursuant to the School District’s upper-leveling policy. The proposed class definition also includes all parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class. (See Doc. No. 48, at 12).
Defendants argue that Plaintiff’s class certification motion should be denied for three separate reasons. First, Defendants argue that the named Plaintiffs lack standing. Second, Defendants contend that Plaintiffs fail to satisfy the numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequate representation prongs of Rule 23(a). Finally, Defendants aver that Plaintiffs do not meet the certification requirements under Rule 23(b)(2). We address each argument in turn.
7

II. STANDING The existence of Article III standing is a necessary prerequisite to class certification. See
McNair v. Synapse Grp., Inc., 672 F.3d 213, 223 n.10 (3d Cir. 2012) (noting that standing is a “necessary threshold issue” to review of class certification). “[I]f none of the named plaintiffs purporting to represent a class establishes the requisite of a case or controversy with the defendants, none may seek relief on behalf of himself or any other member of the class.” O’Shea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 493 (1973). The three “irreducible” constitutional elements of standing are: (1) an injury in fact that is actual or imminent, not “conjectural” or “hypothetical”; (2) a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of – the injury must be fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant; and (3) a showing that it is likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable decision will redress the injury. Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560-61 (1992).
Defendants argue that the named Plaintiffs lack standing to bring claims against the School District because they were never physically transferred, and thus cannot “claim to have suffered an injury to their academic or behavioral progress from the purported policy they seek to challenge.” (Doc. No. 50, at 11). However, Plaintiffs need not demonstrate actual harm or monetary damages to establish standing. On the contrary, “the actual or threatened injury required by Art. III may exist solely by virtue of statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing.” Alston v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 585 F.3d 753, 763 (3d Cir. 2009). Consistent with that precedent, we rejected Defendant’s same argument at the motion to dismiss level, where we explained:
Even though Plaintiffs currently attend their preferred school, Plaintiffs will
8

continue to be subject to the District’s allegedly IDEA-deficient educational placement process from year to year. As such, Plaintiffs’ injuries are imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical, and a favorable court decision will likely redress the systemic failures, if any, in the District’s practices regarding the educational placement and transfer of autistic students. Therefore, under Lujan, Plaintiffs have standing to pursue their claims P.V. v. Sch. Dist. of Phila., No. 2:11-cv-04027, 2011 WL 5127850, at *11 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31, 2011). Although this reasoning was provided over a year ago, the circumstances are such that the language remains applicable. The named Plaintiffs are in grades K-8 and attend a school in the School District, continually subjecting them to the School District’s allegedly IDEA-deficient educational placement process. Therefore, for the same reasons provided at the motion to dismiss level, Plaintiffs have met the necessary prerequisite of Article III standing to pursue class certification. III. CLASS ACTION CERTIFICATION A. Legal Standard for Class Certification A class action is “an exception to the usual rule that litigation is conducted by and on behalf of the individual named parties only.” Califano v. Yamasaki, 442 U.S. 682, 700-01 (1979). Certification of a class action “is proper only ‘if the trial court is satisfied, after a rigorous analysis, that the prerequisites’ of [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23] are met.” In re: Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litig., 552 F.3d 305, 309 (3d Cir. 2009) (citation omitted). This “rigorous analysis” may delve beyond the pleadings and will often “entail some overlap with the merits of the plaintiff’s underlying claim.” Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541, 2551 (2011). However, plaintiffs are not required to establish the validity of their claims at this stage. Rather, a preliminary inquiry into the merits of the case is necessary only to “determine
9

whether the requirements of Rule 23—namely, that the elements of the claim can be proved ‘through evidence common to the class rather than individual to its members’—are met.” Sullivan v. DB Investments, Inc., 667 F.3d 273, 306 (3d Cir. 2011) (quoting In re: Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust Litig., 552 F.3d at 311-12)).
B. Rule 23(a) Requirements To obtain class action certification, Plaintiffs bear the burden to “establish that all four requisites of Rule 23(a) and at least one part of Rule 23(b) are met.” Baby Neal v. Casey, 43 F.3d 48, 55 (3d Cir. 1994). Rule 23(a) states: One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all members only if: (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class; (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class; and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class. The four requirements under Rule 23(a), generally known as numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy, “assure both that class action treatment is necessary and efficient and that it is fair to the absentees under the particular circumstances. While numerosity addresses the first of these concerns, . . . the last three requirements help determine whether the class action can be maintained in a fair and efficient manner.” Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 55. We review each requirement in turn.
1. Numerosity Rule 23(a)(1) requires that the class be “so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.” No minimum number of plaintiffs is required to satisfy the numerosity requirement. Stewart v. Abraham, 275 F.3d 220, 226 (3d Cir. 2001). In general, however, “if the
10

named plaintiff demonstrates that the potential number of plaintiffs exceeds 40, the first prong of Rule 23(a) has been met.” Id., at 226-227.
Here, Plaintiffs assert that the class will include at least 1600 individuals, representing the number of K-8 students in the School District who currently require autism support. (See Doc. No. 61, at 2; see also Doc. No 48, Ex. 23, at 27; Ex. 26). Defendants do not dispute that over 1600 students in the School District currently require autism support. (See Doc. No. 50, at 3 (“For the 2011-2012 school year, 1,684 [K-8] students were identified as requiring access to an autism support classroom.”)). Rather, Defendants contend that the putative class does not include these students because Plaintiffs provide no proof that any of the K-8 autistic students in the School District were ever transferred pursuant to upper-leveling.
While Defendants’ assertion is correct, the evidence makes clear, and Defendants admit, that any autistic student who attends the K-8 grade level in the School District will be upperleveled if his or her school can no longer provide age-appropriate autism support. (See Doc. No. 50, at 5). Defendants go on to explain that whether autism support is offered at a particular location depends on a number of external considerations, including the number of students requiring autism support in the school that year. (See Doc. No. 50, at 4). Based on those considerations, the School District could presumably decide to remove a grade level of autism support from a particular school location, forcing an autistic student to be transferred to a different school. (See id.). Consequently, students with autism in grade levels K-8 in the School District are constantly subject to the risk of being transferred pursuant to the process of upperleveling.
Here, Plaintiffs seek to represent those students at risk of being transferred pursuant to
11

upper-leveling, as well as those already transferred. Therefore, the putative class correctly encompasses all K-8 students with autism in the School District. Considering there are over 1600 such students, we find that joinder of these individuals would be impracticable. Moreover, the proposed class includes future members who are necessarily unidentifiable, which makes joinder even more impracticable. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have satisfied the numerosity requirement.
2. Commonality Under Rule 23(a)(2), Plaintiffs must establish that “there are questions of law or fact common to the class.” The Third Circuit has stated that “[t]he commonality requirement will be satisfied if the named plaintiffs share at least one question of fact or law with the grievances of the prospective class.” Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 56. Moreover, factual differences among the claims of the putative class members do no preclude commonality. Id. at 56. Rather, “[b]ecause the [commonality] requirement may be satisfied by a single common issue, it is easily met.” Id. at 57. “This is especially true where plaintiffs request declaratory and injunctive relief against a defendant engaging in a common course of conduct toward them, and there is therefore no need for individualized determinations of the propriety of injunctive relief.” Id. at 57 (emphasis in original); see, e.g., C.G. v. Pennsylvania, No. 1:06-cv-1523, 2009 WL 3182599, at *5-6 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 29, 2009) (commonality satisfied where “the class members [consisting of disabled students] each were in factually distinct situations in terms of their receipt of FAPE, but the challenge and the desired [injunctive] relief were common to all members”). Defendants contend that in order to prevail, Plaintiffs will have to obtain individualized proof of how each class member was affected by the School District’s “policy” of upper-leveling.
12

Defendants argue that class certification should therefore be barred, on the basis that the Plaintiff’s individualized factual situations foreclose a finding of commonality.6 Defendants fail
to recognize, however, that the central tenet of Plaintiffs’ Complaint alleges a systemic failure,
not a failure of the policy as applied to each member individually. Plaintiffs claim that the
School District’s “policy” of upper-leveling K-8 autistic students, which allegedly involves little
to no parental involvement or consideration of autistic students’ individual needs, constitutes a
violation of the IDEA, Chapter 14, ADA, and § 504.
Plaintiffs correctly point out that their systemic challenge requires a number of factual
and legal determinations, common to all class members. These common questions of fact or law
include whether the School District upper-levels autistic students without meaningful parental
involvement, whether the School District upper-levels autistic students without providing prior
written notice to the parents, whether the School District considers the individual needs of
autistic students prior to deciding where to upper-level that student, and whether the School
District’s “policy” of upper-leveling deprives putative class members of a free and appropriate
public education. Therefore, Plaintiffs have satisfied the commonality requirement.
6 To support their argument, Defendants cite Blunt v. Lower Merion Sch. Dist., 262 F.R.D. 481, 489-90 (E.D. Pa. 2009) for the proposition that individualized proof is necessary to determine whether a school district violates the IDEA. However, unlike this case, the plaintiffs in Blunt who moved for class certification sought “not only injunctive and declaratory relief, but also compensatory education for each of the named plaintiffs and members of the class who were deprived an adequate education.” Id. at 490. As the Third Circuit has explained, a request for damages typically requires individualized determinations of harm. See Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 57 (noting that because “they do not also involve an individualized inquiry for the determination of damage awards, injunctive actions by their very nature often present common questions satisfying Rule 23(a)(2)”). Therefore, Defendants’ reliance on Blunt to negate a finding of commonality here is misplaced.
13

3. Typicality To satisfy Rule 23(a)(3), Plaintiffs must prove that their claims or defenses are “typical of the claims or defenses of the class.” The typicality requirement is intended to ensure that the incentives of the named plaintiffs align with those of absent class members. Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 57. The common claims should be “comparably central to the claims of the named plaintiffs” and not create a potential conflict. Id. (citing Weiss v. York Hosp., 745 F.2d 786, 810 (3d Cir. 1984)). The Third Circuit has also articulated that “cases challenging the same unlawful conduct which affects both the named plaintiffs and the putative class usually satisfy the typicality requirement irrespective of the varying fact patterns underlying the individual claims. . . . Actions requesting declaratory and injunctive relief to remedy conduct directed at the class clearly fit this mold.” Id. at 58 (internal citation omitted). Here, named Plaintiffs and the putative class challenge the same allegedly unlawful conduct of upper-leveling students with autism, and seek injunctive relief to remedy that conduct. The systemic challenge to the School District’s process of upper-leveling autistic students is clearly the central issue to all claims. Defendants contend, however, that Plaintiffs’ claims do not align with the incentives of the representative class because “the best placement for a particular student [in the putative class] might not be in a school building that offers autism support for all grades.” (Doc. No. 50, at 16). Defendants’ argument may be persuasive if Plaintiffs sought for this Court to require
only schools that offer autism support for any grade level to offer autism support for every grade level in that building. On the contrary, the crux of Plaintiffs’ requested relief focuses on providing parents of autistic children with more information and a greater opportunity to get involved with
14

the decision to transfer their child. Defendants do not address how providing greater parental involvement conflicts with the incentives of the representative class members to place their children in the most appropriate learning environment. Providing parents the opportunity to participate in the decisions that affect their children’s education, as well as the information necessary to make informed decisions, would seem only to help ensure the parent’s child is placed in his or her most appropriate classroom environment. We therefore find that the typicality requirement is met.
4. Adequacy of Representation To meet the fourth and final 23(a) prong, Plaintiffs must prove that the “representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4). The primary purpose of Rule 23(a)(4) is “to uncover conflicts of interest between named parties and the class they seek to represent.” In re Warfarin Sodium Antitrust Litig., 391 F.3d 516, 532 (3d Cir. 2004). Proof of “‘[a]dequate representation depends on two factors: (a) the plaintiff's attorney must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation, and (b) the plaintiff must not have interests antagonistic to those of the class.’” New Directions Treatment Servs. v. City of Reading, 490 F.3d 293, 313 (3d Cir. 2007) (quoting Wetzel v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 508 F.2d 239, 247 (3d Cir. 1975)). Defendants do not dispute the qualifications of proposed class counsel. Instead, Defendants largely reiterate their typicality argument by contending that an intra-class conflict exists because some putative class member may prefer not to “attend schools that have autism support for all grades.” (Doc. No. 50, at 18). We already rejected this argument when Defendants moved to strike class action allegations prior to discovery, under the following
15

rationale:
Plaintiffs certainly do not explicitly request that we forbid “any school that is incapable of offering autism support classes to all grade levels from offering [autism support] to any grade levels in that school” or eliminate “autism support classes in many neighborhood schools.” Defendants merely speculate that forcing the District to change its practices regarding transferring autistic students will have the aforementioned results.
Additionally, much of Plaintiffs’ requested relief focuses on providing parents of autistic children with more information and a greater opportunity to get involved with their children’s educational placement. We cannot see how this relief would divide the Plaintiffs’ proposed class to such an extent that an inherent conflict of interest among the class members would prohibit class certification. Parents may or may not take advantage of the opportunity to participate in the decisions that affect their children’s education. However, merely giving parents the option to do so, as well as the information necessary to make informed decisions, would not appear to be a particularly controversial or divisive issue among the autistic community.
P.V. v. Sch. Dist. of Phila., No. 2:11-cv-04027, 2011 WL 5127850, at *5-6 (E.D. Pa. Oct. 31,
2011) (alterations in original). No additional evidence or authority has been presented to this
Court to make the reasoning provided in our previous Order any less applicable.7 We therefore
conclude that Plaintiffs have satisfied all four of the Rule 23(a) factors, including adequate
representation.
7 The reasoning provided in McClendon v. Sch. Dist. of Phila., No. 04-1250, 2005 WL 549532 (E.D. Pa. Mar. 7, 2005), on which Defendants rely, is not applicable to this case. Unlike here, the plaintiffs in McClendon sought compensatory damages based on each plaintiff’s individual agreement. It was precisely because the plaintiffs in McClendon sought compensatory relief that the court determined “[c]ertification of a class would compromise the individual plaintiff’s freedom to resolve their individual cases.” The McClendon court expressly recognized that its case was distinguishable from Baby Neal, where the plaintiffs sought only injunctive relief. McClendon, 2005 WL 549532, at *4; see also Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 63 (“It bears remembering that the plaintiffs here seek only injunctive and declaratory relief; there are no other claims that could compromise the named plaintiffs' pursuit of the class claims.”).
16

C. Rule 23(b)(2) Analysis Rule 23(b)(2) authorizes class action treatment for cases that seek injunctive relief.8 The Third Circuit has held that Rule 23(b)(2) “is almost automatically satisfied in actions primarily seeking injunctive relief” from systemic violations of basic rights. Baby Neal, 43 F.3d at 58, 64; see also Weiss v. York Hosp., 745 F.2d 786, 811 (3d Cir. 1984) (“When a suit seeks to define the relationship between the defendant(s) and the world at large, as in this case, (b)(2) certification is appropriate.”). What is important for purposes of satisfying Rule 23(b)(2) is that the relief sought by the named plaintiffs benefits the entire class. Id. at 59. Defendants argue that given the binding effects of a 23(b)(2) class certification, “absent members of the putative class at issue will effectively be forced to cede to the named plaintiffs and their counsel control over critical decisions regarding their children’s education.” (Doc. No. 50, at 20). Defendants contend that such a result goes directly against the purpose of the IDEA, “which is to create a framework that enables parents and educational professionals to work together.” (Id.). Defendants’ familiar argument once again fails to consider the extent of the relief sought by Plaintiffs. Despite Defendants’ persistent contention to the contrary, Plaintiffs do not seek to dictate where to locate the autism support programs provided to children in the School District. Rather, as already discussed, Plaintiffs mainly seek systemic relief that will provide the opportunity for greater parental involvement to all putative class members in making decisions that allegedly affect the educational placement of their children—relief that is entirely consistent with the IDEA’s promotion of parent-school cooperation. Because the injunctive relief sought by
8 Rule 23(b)(2) states: “A class action may be maintained if Rule 23(a) is satisfied and if . . . the party opposing the class has acted or refused to act on grounds that apply generally to the class, so that final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief is appropriate respecting the class as a whole.”
17

Plaintiffs will benefit the entire class, we conclude that this action is within the type that Rule 23(b)(2) was designed to authorize.9 III. CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing considerations, the Court finds that all the requirements for class certification are met. Accordingly, this action is certified as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) on behalf of the following class: All children with autism in the School District of Philadelphia in grades kindergarten through eight (“K-8") who have been transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are at risk of being transferred, as a result of the School District’s upper-leveling process, the parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class. An appropriate order follows this memorandum.
BY THE COURT: /s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.
9 Because Plaintiffs need only satisfy one subparagraph of Rule 23(b) to certify a class, we need not address Plaintiff’s alternative argument that this case also satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3).
18

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents,

:

Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz,

individually, and on behalf of all others

:

similarly situated, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

:

v.

:

The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,

Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:11-cv-04027

ORDER

AND NOW, this 19th day of February 2013, upon consideration of Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification (Doc. No. 48), Defendant’s Response in Opposition thereto (Doc. No. 50), and Plaintiff’s Reply Brief in Further Support of Motion for Class Certification (Doc. No. 61), we hereby ORDER as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification (Doc. No. 48) is GRANTED.

2. This action is certified as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) on behalf of the following class:

All children with autism in the School District of Philadelphia in grades kindergarten through eight (“K-8") who have been transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are at risk of being transferred, as a result of the School District’s upper-leveling process, the parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class.

3. Plaintiffs P.V. and his parents Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz; M.M. and his parent Carla Murphy; J.V. and his parents Sharon Vargas and Ismael Vargas; and R.S. and his parents Heather Sanasac and Matthew Sanasac, are appointed as class representatives.

4. The Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (“PILCOP”) and Dechert, LLP are appointed as class counsel. BY THE COURT:

/s/ Legrome D. Davis Legrome D. Davis, J.

 
 Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 1 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,
Defendants.

) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-04027 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

Defendant, the School District of Philadelphia and Plaintiffs, students with autism by and

through their parents, hereby jointly request this Court to: (1) preliminarily approve the Settlement

Agreement attached hereto as Exhibit A; (2) approve the notice to the class in the form attached

hereto as Exhibit B; and (3) schedule a hearing pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)

to determine that the Settlement Agreement is a “fair, reasonable and adequate” settlement of this

class action. The Settlement Agreement was negotiated and approved by all parties to this

litigation in the course of a mediation before Magistrate Judge Timothy R. Rice. The reasons in

support of this motion are set forth in the accompanying Memorandum.

Dated: April 15, 2014

Respectfully,
/s/ Sonja Kerr Sonja Kerr (I.D. No. 95137)
skerr@pilcop.org PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA 1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, Second Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 627-7100 Facsimile: (215) 627-3183

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 2 of 17
Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs Cheryl Krause (I.D. No. 90297)
cheryl.krause@dechert.com David J. Stanoch (I.D. No. 91342)
david.stanoch@dechert.com Darla D. Woodring (I.D. No. 306866)
darla.woodring@dechert.com DECHERT LLP Cira Centre 2929 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19104-2808 Telephone: (215) 994-4000 Facsimile: (215) 994-2222 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs
/s/ David Smith David Smith (I.D. No. 21480)
dsmith@schnader.com Benjamin D. Wanger (I.D. No. 209317)
bwanger@schnader.com SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP 1600 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103-7286 Telephone: (215) 751-2000 Facsimile: (215) 751-2205 Counsel for Defendants
2

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 3 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,
Defendants.

) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-04027 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
Defendant, the School District of Philadelphia (the “School District”) and Plaintiffs,

students with autism and their parents (collectively the “Parties”) move for the preliminary

approval of a Settlement Agreement that they have reached in the above-referenced class action,

as well as for approval of a class notice. The Parties submit that the Settlement Agreement (Ex.

A) meets the standards for preliminary approval of a class action settlement and that such approval

should be granted. The Parties also submit the proposed Notice to be sent to class members (Ex.

B) for the Court’s approval.

INTRODUCTION
On June 20, 2011, Plaintiffs filed this class action against the School District, the School
Reform Commission (“SRC”), and two School District personnel. As found by this Court:
Plaintiffs contend[ed] that the School District transfers students with autism automatically from one school to another, simply because they complete a certain grade, more frequently than the School District transfers non-disabled students who therefore, unlike autistic children, enjoy continued, uninterrupted attendance in K-5 schools or K-8 schools. (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 1). Plaintiffs further allege[d] that the decision-making process leading up to the transfer of an autistic

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 4 of 17
student is conducted with little to no parental notice or involvement, and without the required consideration of the children’s individualized circumstances. (Doc. No. 1, at ¶ 2). Document 72, at 1-2. Plaintiffs asserted claims under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. and as amended (“IDEA”), Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code of Education Regulations, 22 Pa. Code § 14 et seq. (“Chapter 14”), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. and as amended (“ADA”), and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794 (“Section 504”). On October 31, 2011, the Court denied the Defendants’ motions to dismiss and strike class allegations (Docs. 23 and 24). Discovery began in early 2012, and consisted of depositions of numerous employees of the School District, Plaintiff parents, and experts. Plaintiffs prevailed on their motion to compel during discovery (Doc. 39) and Defendants produced over 17,000 documents. Discovery closed on June 11, 2012. The Parties engaged in lengthy class certification and summary judgment briefing, including surreplies. By Orders and Memorandum Opinions entered on February 19, 2013, the Court granted in part and denied in part cross motions for summary judgment (Docs. 74 and 75) and granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) with respect to the claims on which summary judgment was entered for Plaintiffs (Docs. 72 and 73). The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Defendants on Plaintiffs’ claims that the School District transfers students with autism automatically from one school to another, simply because they complete a certain grade, more frequently than the School District transfers non-disabled students who therefore, unlike children with autism, enjoy continued, uninterrupted attendance in K-5 schools or K-8 schools. The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs on Plaintiffs’ claims that the decision-making process leading up to the transfer of a student with autism is conducted with little to no parental notice or involvement, and
2

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 5 of 17
without the required consideration of the child’s individualized circumstances. Accordingly, the Court ordered the School District to “alter its upper-leveling process for children with autism to provide prior written notice and a level of parental participation that complies with the procedural requirements under the IDEA.” (Doc. 74).
Defendants filed a motion for reconsideration (Doc. 76) on February 27, 2013 and the Court held a hearing on the motion on April 16, 2013. On August 14, 2013, after denying the Defendants’ motion for reconsideration (Doc. 101), the Court re-opened this matter (Doc. 100) to determine the “specific contours of injunctive relief” or alternatively to give the Parties an opportunity to settle. Id. The Parties began settlement negotiations in May 2013.
The Parties’ settlement negotiations progressed and after enlisting the help of Magistrate Judge Rice, the Parties have negotiated a comprehensive Settlement Agreement dated April 15, 2014 covering the issues in the case. See Ex. A. The negotiations were at arm’s length. Each side fully understands the terms, and has compromised to reach the Agreement.
As noted above, the remaining issues in this lawsuit relate to notice and participation by parents in decisions to upper-level their children (grades K-8) with autism. The Settlement Agreement provides three ways that parents of class members will receive this critical information.
First, although the Court had granted summary judgment for Defendants on this issue, Defendants have agreed to publish annually a list of all the schools within the School District that have Autistic Support (“AS”) classrooms in grades K-8.1 Plaintiffs regard this list as an integral piece of information necessary to enable parents to effectively understand and potentially engage the School District about upper-leveling decisions. 1 The list may be published with appropriate disclaimers regarding its accuracy and that school configurations are subject to change at any time throughout the year.
3

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 6 of 17
The School District has also agreed to provide two letter notices to class members who will likely be upper-leveled the following school year in a manner consistent with the sample notice letters attached hereto at Exhibit C.
The first letter will be sent on or about January 17 and will notify parents of the transfer and inform them that they can talk to a School District designee or their child’s classroom teacher about upper-leveling or request an IEP meeting to discuss their child’s needs.
A second letter will be sent on or about June 12 and include building assignment information, enclose the most current version of “Parents’ Rights: Understanding the Procedural Safeguards Notice” booklet and inform parents they can contact a School District designee, call the Office for Dispute Resolution or contact any organization listed in the booklet for more information about mediation or filing a due process request.
Thus, the terms of the proposed Settlement Agreement provide notice and an opportunity for parental participation. Indeed, because the Court did not order the School District to provide a public list of classrooms, the Settlement exceeds the relief received by Plaintiffs. Two notices, giving parents two opportunities to provide input into the upper-leveling decision process, is consistent with and satisfies the Court’s order that parents be given prior written notice. Prior written notice, as defined by 34 C.F.R. § 300.503 requires that parents receive notice of an action proposed or refused by the School District, an explanation of the action proposed or refused, and information about their rights and sources for assistance a reasonable time before the School District acts to propose or refuse an action affecting the child’s special education. By providing
2 As the effective date of the Settlement Agreement is April 2014, class members will only receive the June notice for the current (2013-2014) school year and that letter will not include the language from the sample at Exhibit C that prior notice was given. Furthermore, because June 1, 2014 is a Sunday, the notice letters will be sent by June 2, 2014.
4

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 7 of 17
parents two separate notices, one in January and one in June, the School District will afford parents with information in the spirit of the prior written notice required.
Although the Settlement Agreement calls for the dismissal of all claims, the Court will retain limited jurisdiction to enforce the Settlement Agreement until January 2, 2017. If the Parties believe that the Settlement Agreement has been breached, they must meet and confer in good faith and if they are unable to resolve the issue, the matter will be referred to Magistrate Judge Rice to enforce the Settlement Agreement and apply an appropriate remedy. The release provisions cover all claims that were or could have been brought by Plaintiffs for prospective injunctive relief challenging the School District’s policy or practice, but exclude all individual claims by class members regarding upper-level transfers that they have a statutory right to bring. Finally, the Settlement Agreement provides for $325,000 in attorneys’ fees and expenses to class counsel (payable in three installments), which are at a substantial discount from the lodestar. Thus, the settlement will “remedy current conditions and provide[] a viable mechanism” for compliance in the future. See Collier v. Montgomery County Hous. Auth., 192 F.R.D. 176, 186 (E.D. Pa. 2000). Notice will be provided via first-class mail, and publication via newspaper and website.
Given that the Settlement Agreement will terminate this lengthy litigation and will benefit class members fairly and adequately, for the reasons expressed more fully below, the School District and Plaintiffs jointly request the Court preliminarily approve the Settlement Agreement and notice to the Class.
5

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 8 of 17
ARGUMENT I. The Settlement Agreement Fully Satisfies The Standards For Preliminary Approval Of A
Class Action Settlement. When approving a class action settlement, the court must ultimately evaluate “whether the
settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable.” Walsh v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co., 726 F.2d 956, 965 (3d Cir. 1983). “The law looks favorably upon class action settlements because avoiding a trial [and appeal] conserves scarce judicial resources.” Perry v. FleetBoston Fin. Corp., 229 F.R.D. 105, 114 (E.D. Pa. 2005). The Court must give its “initial blessing” to the preliminary settlement, i.e., before class notice is given and a formal fairness hearing is held. See id.
“In evaluating a proposed settlement for preliminary approval . . . the Court is required to determine only whether ‘the proposed settlement discloses grounds to doubt its fairness or other obvious deficiencies such as unduly preferential treatment of class representatives or segments of the class, or excessive compensation of attorneys, and whether it appears to fall within the range of possible approval.’” Mehling v. New York Life Insur. Co., 246 F.R.D. 467, 472 (E.D. Pa. 2007) (quoting Thomas v. NCO Fin. Sys., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14157, at *14 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 2002)). Courts also typically evaluate if the settlement resulted from serious arm’s-length negotiations. Id. at 472.
The Settlement Agreement meets the standard for preliminary approval. Class members have obtained the relief to which the Court found they were entitled—parental notice prior to transfer, an opportunity for parental participation in the transfer decision, and, in addition, some of the relief to which the Court found they were not entitled—information regarding where K-8 AS classrooms are located within the School District. The Settlement Agreement also provides a mechanism for enforcing the Settlement Agreement by allowing this Court and by extension
6

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 9 of 17
Magistrate Judge Rice to retain limited jurisdiction until January 2017. A separate enforcement action can be brought after that time.
The Settlement Agreement should be preliminarily approved for the following reasons. A. The Settlement Negotiations Were Serious, Informed And At Arm’s-Length. The negotiations that led to the proposed Settlement Agreement were undoubtedly at arm’s length. It came only after lengthy vigorously contested litigation, with extensive briefing including motions to strike, dismiss, compel, class certification, summary judgment and reconsideration. The Parties also had the advantage of a review of the evidence by autism and special education experts. The Parties first engaged in settlement negotiations after the Court held a hearing on the School District’s motion for reconsideration. To avoid a time-consuming and costly appeal, the Parties began settlement negotiations in May 2013 and, with the assistance of Magistrate Judge Rice, reached a preliminary settlement of the merits in late December 2013. The Settlement Agreement reflects not only the interests of the class, but importantly maintains the statutory rights of individual class members. Settlement of the substantive provisions was completed in principle prior to final determination of any payment of attorneys’ fees and costs on February 28, 2014. Clearly, this Settlement Agreement did not come early in the litigation, but only after extensive discovery, merits briefing and, indeed, substantive class and merits rulings by this Court. Thus, the Parties were able to evaluate their respective positions based on the robust amount of information available to them.
7

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 10 of 17
B. The Proposed Settlement Agreement Contains No Obvious Deficiencies. The proposed Settlement Agreement contains no obvious deficiencies such as preference to certain class members or excessive attorneys’ fees, and is within the range for approval. The Settlement Agreement provides the Plaintiff class with a remedy that exceeds the relief ordered by this Court: (1) the School District will publish a list of all the schools within the School District that have AS classrooms3 and the grade range of those classrooms; (2) the School District will provide two letter notices to class members prior to transferring them; and (3) the School District will inform parents that they can discuss the proposed transfer at an IEP meeting and retain their rights to challenge their own individual transfer. The relief gained through this Settlement Agreement benefits each class member and will be applied uniformly to all class members. This settlement proposal is certainly within the range of possible approval. Attorneys’ fees are reasonable as class counsel will obtain $325,000 in fees and costs from the School District, which is substantially less than their lodestar rate. See Samuel v. Equicredit Corp., 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8234 at *5 n. 4 (E.D. Pa. May 6, 2002) (a $625,000 settlement preliminarily approved where fees were equal to or less than plaintiffs’ lodestar). Class counsel will receive no additional fees or costs for monitoring implementation of the Settlement Agreement. C. The Settlement Agreement Is Fair And Reasonable. After notice and a fairness hearing are provided, a court must determine if the final settlement is fair and reasonable. A court “should presume a class settlement is fair when four factors apply: ‘(1) the settlement negotiations occurred at arm’s length; (2) there was sufficient discovery; (3) the proponents of the settlement are experienced in similar litigation; and (4) only a
3 Classrooms serving children in grades K-8.
8

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 11 of 17
small fraction of the class objected.’” Chester Upland Sch. Dist. v. Commonwealth, 284 F.R.D. 305, 323 (E.D. Pa. 2012) (quoting In re Warfarin, 391 F.3d 516, 535 (3d Cir. 2004)).
Here, the Settlement Agreement easily satisfies the fairness presumption. As discussed supra, the negotiations were at arm’s-length. Moreover, settlement occurred after discovery which included the production of thousands of documents and numerous depositions of School District representatives, Plaintiff parents, and experts. The Parties’ counsel are experienced in similar litigation as PILCOP has litigated many federal class actions to protect the civil rights of individuals with disabilities. Dechert LLP is an international law firm with 26 offices in the United States, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. Dechert is highly experienced in handling complex litigation and class action matters. Schnader Harrison Segal & Lewis LLP is a reputable mid-sized law firm with many decades of experience in class action litigation. As this action was for injunctive relief, the class has not yet had an opportunity to object or react to the settlement.
Additionally, to determine if a proposed settlement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e) is fair, reasonable, and adequate, the Third Circuit in Girsh v. Jepson, 521 F.2d 153 (3d Cir. 1975) enumerated nine factors courts should consider:
(1) the complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation; (2) the reaction of the class to the settlement; (3) the stage of the proceedings and the amount of discovery completed; (4) the risks of establishing liability; (5) the risks of establishing damages; (6) the risks of maintaining the class action through trial; (7) the ability of the defendants to withstand a greater judgment;
9

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 12 of 17
(8) the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund in light of the best possible recovery; and (9) the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund to a possible recovery in light of all the attendant risks of litigation. Id. at 157. An analysis of these factors confirms that the proposed Settlement Agreement is fair and reasonable. (1) The complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation. Although the Court granted partial summary judgment on the IDEA claim in favor of Plaintiffs and denied the School District’s motion for reconsideration, the Court indicated that it would hold a hearing, if the case did not settle, to determine the exact contours of the injunctive relief requiring additional expense and effort by counsel. Furthermore, the legal issues were challenging and the possibility of appeal by the School District was strong. An appeal would have delayed the implementation of relief to the class. (2) The reaction of the class to the settlement. This factor can only be assessed after notice and hearing; however, Plaintiffs are in favor of the settlement, and class counsel are not aware of any class members who have expressed a negative reaction to it. (3) The stage of the proceedings and the amount of discovery completed. This factor “captures the degree of case development . . . prior to settlement” and “[t]hrough this lens, courts can determine whether counsel had an adequate appreciation of the merits of the case before negotiating.” In re GMC Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank Prods. Liab. Litig., 55 F.3d 768, 813 (3d Cir. 1995). Counsel’s appreciation of the merits was well-developed in the present case by at least February 19, 2013, when the Court certified the class and resolved cross motions for summary judgment, revealing the strengths and weaknesses of the case.
10

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 13 of 17
(4) The risks of establishing liability. This Court granted in part and denied in part cross motions for summary judgment. Some of the issues presented to the Court were relatively novel and untested in this jurisdiction. All parties faced significant risks in the further proceedings ordered by this Court and, if an appeal were to be filed, in the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
(5) The risks of establishing damages. Because this was an action for injunctive relief, the fifth Girsh factor does not apply. Hawker v. Consovoy, 198 F.R.D. 619, 632 (D.N.J. 2001).
(6) The risks of maintaining the class action through trial. The class was certified prior to trial and the action was decided on cross motions for summary judgment; thus, there is little risk associated with this factor.
(7) The ability of the defendants to withstand a greater judgment. Because this action sought injunctive and declaratory relief, this factor is inapplicable.
(8) The range of reasonableness of the settlement fund in light of the best possible recovery and (9) the range of reasonableness of the settlement fund to a possible recovery in light of all the attendant risks of litigation. In evaluating these factors in a case seeking injunctive relief, courts compare the relief accorded by the settlement to the relief Plaintiffs could expect to receive after trial, in light of the risks of litigation. D.M. v. Terhune, 67 F. Supp. 2d 401, 410-11 (D.N.J. 1999). Here, the settlement addresses the crux of the relief ordered by the Court and, indeed, some of the relief denied by the Court. The Settlement Agreement provides a conduct-driven remedy that was specifically attuned to the unique issues presented in this case by capable parties and counsel well-versed in educational settings, processes, and law. Further, as noted above, there are risks and costs associated with continuing the litigation. Plaintiffs could lose or achieve less than this Settlement Agreement after the Court defines “the specific contours
11

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 14 of 17
of injunctive relief” or after the Third Circuit reviews the case. The settlement is a fair resolution of Plaintiffs’ claims, in light of all the attendant risks of litigation. II. The Proposed Notice To Class Members Is Adequate.
The Parties propose that notice be given to class members through a variety of methods, including notifying identifiable parents of students with autism in grades K-8, and identifiable parents of rising kindergarten students currently enrolled in early intervention, by first class mail by the School District, additionally through publication in the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News, the Philadelphia Tribune, and the Notebook (an educational newspaper) as well as publication on the School District’s website and PILCOP’s website. The School District shall bear the costs, other than for PILCOP’s website.
As this class action was certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) (Doc. 72), the notice requirements are less stringent than for Rule 23(b)(3) class actions which typically involve money damages. Rule 23(c)(2)(A) states that “[f]or any class certified under Rule 23(b)(1) or (b)(2), the court may direct appropriate notice to the class.” Rule 23(e) governs proposed settlements and requires the court to “direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class members who would be bound by the proposal.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(1); see also Daniel B. v. O’Bannon, 633 F. Supp. 919, 926 (E.D. Pa. 1986) (“The court complied with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) by ordering notice of the proposed settlement sent by first class mail to all class members as well as to parents, guardians or family representatives. Any additional notice in a Rule 23(b)(2) case is not obligatory but discretionary with the court.”). Generally to comply with Rule 23(e) the notice must be reasonable and “the best practicable under the circumstances.” Daniel B., 633 F. Supp. at 922; Harris v. City of Phila., No. 82-CV-1847, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12579, at *34 (E.D. Pa. Aug. 30, 2000).
12

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 15 of 17
Here the notice is fair and reasonable and the best practicable under the circumstances. Dissemination is more than satisfactory—not only will the vast majority of class member receive the notice by mail, but the School District’s website, PILCOP’s website and four Philadelphia newspapers will also contain the notice. Finally, the form of notice is adequate to inform class members of their rights. The notice provides a summary of the content of the lawsuit and its procedural history, details the history of settlement negotiations, and explains the settlement terms in simple/plain language. The notice also provides instructions on obtaining information relevant to the litigation, gives contact information for inquiries concerning the Settlement Agreement, sets forth the process for objecting to the Settlement Agreement, and explains that individual claimants reserve their rights.
CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Parties respectfully request that the Court preliminarily approve the proposed Settlement Agreement, approve the Parties’ proposed form of notice and proposal for providing notice, and set this matter for a fairness hearing.

Dated: April 15, 2014

Respectfully,
/s/ Sonja Kerr Sonja Kerr (I.D. No. 95137)
skerr@pilcop.org PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA 1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, Second Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 627-7100 Facsimile: (215) 627-3183
Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs
13

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 16 of 17
Cheryl Krause (I.D. No. 90297) cheryl.krause@dechert.com
David J. Stanoch (I.D. No. 91342) david.stanoch@dechert.com
Darla D. Woodring (I.D. No. 306866) darla.woodring@dechert.com
DECHERT LLP Cira Centre 2929 Arch Street Philadelphia, PA 19104-2808 Telephone: (215) 994-4000 Facsimile: (215) 994-2222 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs
/s/ David Smith David Smith (I.D. No. 21480)
dsmith@schnader.com Benjamin D. Wanger (I.D. No. 209317)
bwanger@schnader.com SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP 1600 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103-7286 Telephone: (215) 751-2000 Facsimile: (215) 751-2205 Counsel for Defendants
14

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114 Filed 04/15/14 Page 17 of 17

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

P.V., a minor, by and through his Parents, Pedro Valentin and Yolanda Cruz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. The School District of Philadelphia, et al.,
Defendants.

) ) ) Civil Action No. 2:11-cv-04027 ) ) ) ) ) )

[PROPOSED] ORDER AND NOW, this _____ day of ____________, 2014, upon consideration of Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement and the Memorandum in Support of the Joint Motion, it is hereby ORDERED that: (1) The Settlement Agreement as proposed by the Parties is preliminarily approved; (2) A hearing to determine if the Settlement Agreement is “fair, reasonable and adequate” pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) shall be held on ______ 2014 at ____ o’clock in Courtroom _____ U.S. Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106; (3) The notice to class submitted with the Joint Motion is approved and the School District of Philadelphia is directed to provide notice by first class mail to all class members it can identify from its records, and publish the notice in four publications, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Philadelphia Daily News, the Philadelphia Tribune, and the Notebook. In addition, the School District of Philadelphia and the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia are directed to post the notice on their websites.
BY THE COURT: _______________________________
Davis, J

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 1 of 13
Exhibit A

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 2 of 13
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
AND NOW, this 15th day of April, 2014, the undersigned parties, as further described herein, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants further contained herein, and intending to be legally bound, hereby agree as follows:
I. BACKGROUND A. Parties. This Settlement Agreement (“Agreement”) is made by and between: (1) the School District of Philadelphia (the “School District”) and the School Reform Commission (“SRC”)1 (collectively “Defendants”) and (2) P.V., M.M., J.V., and R.S., by and through their parents (“Plaintiffs”) and the class certified by the Court in P.V. v. The School District of Philadelphia, 289 F.R.D. 227, 236 (E.D. Pa. 2013): All children with autism in the School District of Philadelphia in grades kindergarten through eight (“K-8”) who have been transferred, are in the process of being transferred, or are at risk of being transferred, as a result of the School District’s upper-leveling process, the parents and guardians of those children, and future members of the class. (the “Class” or “Plaintiff Class”). B. Terminology. As used herein, the term “Upper-Leveling” or “UpperLevel Transfer” refers to when a student whose Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) requires use of an Autistic Support (“AS”) classroom completes the highest grade level for which an AS classroom is provided in his or her current school building and the School District transfers that student to a different school where those services can continue to be provided, despite that students completing the same grade level who do not require use of an AS classroom can continue to the next grade level in the same school building.
1 None of the individual defendants named in the complaint is currently employed by the School District.
1

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 3 of 13
C. Resolution of Pending Litigation and Claims. This Agreement concerns the resolution and dismissal of all Class claims seeking prospective injunctive relief challenging the School District’s Upper-Leveling of class members which are or could have been asserted in P.V. v. The School District of Philadelphia, No. 2:11-cv-4027 (E.D. Pa.) (the “P.V. matter”), in exchange for the consideration specifically set forth herein.
II. SETTLEMENT TERMS A. List of AS Classrooms. By October 15 of each school year, the School District shall publish a list of all the schools within the School District that have AS classrooms for children in grades K-8. The list may be published with appropriate disclaimers regarding its accuracy and that school configurations are subject to change at any time throughout the school year. The list shall be published on the School District’s website in a conspicuous and clear manner. B. Notice. The School District shall provide parents of children with autism two notice letters, – one in January and one in June2 – prior to any potential UpperLeveling of any Class member. The notice letters and list of classrooms (see supra Part II(A)), together, shall constitute and satisfy the spirit of prior written notice. All letters shall be copied (“cc’d”) to the child’s entire IEP team. The draft letters speak for themselves and are attached hereto as Exhibit 1, but for further clarification:
2 As the effective date of the Settlement Agreement is April 2014, class members will only receive the June notice for the current (2013-2014) school year and that letter will not include the language from the sample at Exhibit C that prior notice was given. Furthermore, because June 1, 2014 is a Sunday, the notice letters will be sent by June 2, 2014.
2

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 4 of 13
(i) The first letter will be sent on or about January 17 and will notify parents of a potential Upper-Level Transfer and inform them that they can talk to a School District designee or their child’s classroom teacher about Upper-Leveling or request an IEP meeting to discuss their child’s needs.
(ii) The second letter will be sent on or about June 1 and include building assignment information, enclose the most current version of “Parents’ Rights: Understanding the Procedural Safeguards Notice” booklet and inform parents that they can contact a School District designee, call the Office for Dispute Resolution or contact any other organization listed in the booklet for more information about mediation or filing a due process request.
C. Maintenance of Individual Rights. Individual Class members shall retain their statutory rights to challenge the circumstances of their own Upper-Level Transfer, including those contained within 20 U.S.C. § 1415 and 34 C.F.R. § 300, et seq.
D. Enforcement of Settlement Agreement. (i) Continuing Limited Jurisdiction. The Parties agree that the Court
shall retain jurisdiction through January 2, 2017, for the sole and limited purpose of enforcing compliance with this Agreement in accordance with the terms of this paragraph. Such jurisdiction shall automatically terminate effective January 3, 2017, except that with respect to any enforcement action commenced in accordance with the provisions of this section prior to January 3, 2017, but remaining open as of that date, such matter shall continue to final resolution; otherwise, after January 3, 2017, the
3

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 5 of 13
Court shall be fully and completely divested of jurisdiction with respect to the enforcement of this Agreement.
(ii) Enforcement. If at any time from the final Court approval of the Agreement through January 3, 2017, Class counsel have a reasonably justified and colorable grievance regarding compliance with this Agreement on a Class-wide, and not individualized, basis, Class counsel shall give written notice to the School District with a copy to counsel for the School District. The School District shall have 60 calendar days to resolve the alleged concern on the basis described in such grievance and developed through further communication between the Parties. If, after the expiration of such resolution period, Class counsel is not reasonably satisfied with any proposed action or resolution, they may make a filing with Magistrate Judge Rice to enforce the Agreement. Judge Rice shall apply an appropriate remedy with respect to the specific matters addressed in the written complaint only and no others. The mechanism set forth in this Paragraph II(D)(ii) shall not be used to resolve grievances regarding specific Class members who may invoke appropriate administrative processes regarding their individual rights. For avoidance of doubt, this Agreement survives the divestment of the Court’s jurisdiction, and may be enforced after January 3, 2017 via other legal process or action.
E. Class Action Settlement Approval. The Parties agree to cooperate and cause to be filed on or before April 15, 2014, a joint motion for preliminary approval of settlement agreement, and to otherwise facilitate approval of the Agreement including the submission of a form of notice to the Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 as required by
4

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 6 of 13
rule and/or other Order of the Court. The Parties understand and agree that the burden of proof and persuasion concerning the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of this Agreement shall rest with the Plaintiff Class regarding approval of this Agreement. Thus Plaintiffs will take the lead in drafting and Defendants shall have the opportunity to review the motion and Class notice form prior to submission to the Court. It is further understood and agreed by the Parties that the motion for settlement agreement approval and related papers filed with the Court shall note that the Defendants join the petition of the Plaintiffs.
III. RELEASE A. Class Claims. The Parties hereby remise, release, quitclaim and forever discharge each other and their respective successors, assigns, affiliates, employees, agents, directors, officers, boards, divisions, bureaus, sections and all other related entities, whether or not officially constituted, of and from all and any manner of actions, causes of actions, judgments, suits, debts, accounts, and claims for services or fines, monies, fees, expenses and/or other amounts, arising out of or relating to the P.V. matter, except as specifically outlined herein in Paragraphs II(C) and III(B). B. No Individual Waiver. Nothing in Paragraph III(A), or anywhere else in the Agreement, shall be construed or is intended to mean that any individual Class member is waiving any right or opportunity to file an individual due process complaint or to seek other recourse with respect to any issue arising in the course of the School District’s provision of special education programs and services to him or her, including, e.g., to file a special education complaint with the Pennsylvania Department of
5

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 7 of 13
Education, or to take any action to enforce individual rights under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. and as amended (including 20 U.S.C. § 1415), Chapter 14 of the Pennsylvania Code of Education Regulations, 22 Pa. Code § 14 et seq., Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. and as amended, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. § 794, or other applicable rules or laws. Nothing in this Agreement shall constitute in any way a waiver of the provisions of the LeGare Consent Decree for those Class members in grade 8.
IV. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. V. ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS The Parties agree that the School District will pay the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (“PILCOP”), as Class counsel, $325,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs in three installments. The School District’s first payment of $100,000 is due 60 calendar days after receiving final approval from the Court. The School District shall make its second payment of $125,000 on or before October 15, 2014. The School District shall make its third and final payment of $100,000 on or before July 15, 2015. Plaintiffs’ counsel agree to waive and shall not be entitled to any additional fee for monitoring or administering this Agreement except to the extent it may be a prevailing party in any proceeding to enforce it, including enforcement of the attorneys’ fees and costs referenced herein. With the exception of the amounts set forth in this Paragraph V, the
6

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 8 of 13
Parties hereto are otherwise each responsible for the payment of their own respective attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs incurred in connection with the P.V. matter.
VI. CLASS NOTICE The School District shall administer and bear the costs associated with disseminating notice to class members of the Agreement via first-class mail within ten business days of the Court’s preliminary approval of the Agreement. Within five business days of mailing the notice, the School District shall certify in writing to Plaintiffs’ counsel how many letters it has mailed. The School District also shall cause and bear the costs associated with the publication of the class notice, no less than ¼ of one page in size, in the Philadelphia Inquirer, Philadelphia Daily News, Philadelphia Tribune, and Philadelphia Notebook, to be run weekly for at least two full weeks within ten business days of the Court’s preliminary approval of the Agreement. Within five business days of arranging for newspaper publication, the School District shall certify in writing to Plaintiffs’ counsel the size, frequency, and run dates for the notice to be published. The School District also shall publish the class notice on its website, via a clear and conspicuous link that shall be active through final approval, within ten business days of the Court’s preliminary approval of the Agreement. Within three business days of arranging for website publication, the School District shall certify in writing to Plaintiffs’ counsel the link, manner, and format of the notice’s publication on the School District’s website. VII. ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement is the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, there are no other agreements, express or implied, choate or inchoate,
7

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 9 of 13
relating to the subject matter hereof, and, if there is, and it is not set forth and referenced specifically herein, it is hereby declared null, void and of no further force, influence, consequence or effect. No promise or inducement not herein expressed has been made to any of the Parties, by any of the Parties, and no party hereto relies on any statement or representation made by any person, whether or not a party hereto, which is not specifically set forth in this Agreement.
VIII. COUNSEL Counsel are executing this Agreement on behalf of the Parties hereto, and counsel hereby represent and warrant that their respective clients have consulted with them or other counsel of their choice regarding the content, meaning and effect of this Agreement, and that their mutual execution on behalf of their clients indicates that they are authorized to act on their client’s behalf, and that such client acted freely, willingly and upon being fully informed of its or their legal rights, without duress, coercion or otherwise. The Parties hereto agree that this Agreement was jointly drafted and that it shall not, in the event of any dispute, be construed or construable against any of them on the basis of the source of draftsmanship.
8

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 10 of 13

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Settlement Agreement has been duly executed by counsel, authorized to do so as indicated herein:
PLAINTIFF CLASS

Dated: April 15, 2014

/s/ Sonja Kerr Sonja Kerr, Esq.

Dated: April 15, 2014

DEFENDANTS
/s/ David Smith David Smith, Esq.

9

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 11 of 13
Exhibit 1

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 12 of 13
January 17, 20__
VIA REGULAR MAIL Parent(s) of Class Member 1234 Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 191xx
Re: Notice of Change Dear Parent: Your child is currently in the [insert current grade] and assigned to a [insert current classroom grade range] Autistic Support (“AS”) classroom at [insert name of current school]. That school will not have an AS program available for students in grades [insert next classroom grade range] next year. If your child continues to need a supplemental level of autistic support for the next school year, your child will be assigned next year to a new school building that has a grade-appropriate AS classroom. The School District is currently in the process of determining a location. You will receive a letter in June notifying you of your child’s new school assignment. [Your child will be assigned to X building next year (if known replace previous 2 sentences)]. Please do not hesitate to contact me at [insert designee’s telephone number] regarding this transfer. You can also speak with your child’s classroom teacher regarding transition issues, or request an IEP meeting to discuss your child’s needs.
Sincerely,
[School District designee]
cc: IEP Team LEA, SEL, and Special Education Teacher

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-1 Filed 04/15/14 Page 13 of 13
June 1, 20__
VIA REGULAR MAIL Parent(s) of Class Member 1234 Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 191xx
Re: Notice of Change Dear Parent: We informed you previously that your child will be assigned to a new school building next year because your child’s current school building will not have a grade-appropriate Autistic Support (“AS”) classroom for your child. Your child will be assigned to [next school building] for the 20__-__ school year. I am available to answer questions or to discuss any concerns you may have. My telephone number is [insert designee’s telephone number]. I have enclosed the “Parents’ Rights: Understanding the Procedural Safeguards Notice” pamphlet published by the Pennsylvania Department of Education Bureau of Special Education which can provide you with more information. You can call the Office for Dispute Resolution (“ODR”) at 1-800-222-3353 or any organization listed in the pamphlet for more information about mediation or to file a request for a due process hearing. If, after talking to the ODR or other organizations listed, you intend to mediate or to file for a due process hearing, please notify me at the above number as well. Sincerely,
[School District designee]
cc: IEP Team LEA, SEL and Special Education Teacher

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-2 Filed 04/15/14 Page 1 of 4
Exhibit B

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-2 Filed 04/15/14 Page 2 of 4
Notice to Parents of Students with Autism in the School District of Philadelphia
Notice of Hearing to Settle Class Action Litigation:
This Notice describes a proposed Settlement Agreement between parents of students with autism who attend school in the School District of Philadelphia and the School District of Philadelphia (the “Parties”). This Notice tells you what the Parties have agreed to, how to get more information regarding the Settlement, and how to object to the proposed Settlement Agreement if you think it is not fair as it relates to the provision of special education services in the School District.
On January 20, 2011, Plaintiffs, students with autism and their parents sued the School District of Philadelphia and challenged the School District’s policy and practice of automatically transferring, or “upper-leveling,” K-8 students with autism to different schools, without prior notice or input from parents or other Individualized Education Program (“IEP”) team members. This case is called P.V. v. The School District of Philadelphia, No. 2:11-cv-4027 (E.D. Pa.).
By Orders and Memorandum Opinions entered on February 19, 2013, the Court granted in part and denied in part cross motions for summary judgment (Docs. 74 and 75) and granted Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(2) with respect to the claims on which summary judgment was entered for Plaintiffs (Docs. 72 and 73). The Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs on Plaintiffs’ claims that the decision-making process leading up to the transfer of a student with autism is conducted with little to no parental notice or involvement, and without the required consideration of the child’s individualized circumstances. Accordingly, the Court ordered the School District to “alter its upper-leveling process for children with autism to provide prior written notice and a level of parental participation that complies with the procedural requirements under the IDEA.” (Doc. 74).
To avoid further litigation, the Parties have reached a Settlement Agreement and have filed a motion requesting the Court to approve it.
On ______ 2014 at ____ o’clock in Courtroom _____ of the U.S. Courthouse, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106, Judge Davis will hold a fairness hearing to receive testimony on whether to approve the Settlement Agreement.

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-2 Filed 04/15/14 Page 3 of 4
Notice to Parents of Students with Autism in the School District of Philadelphia
The Settlement Agreement does not affect the rights of any individual students or their parent(s)/guardian(s) to claim the student was denied special education programs or services which he or she was entitled to receive under state or federal law and seek appropriate relief.
The Settlement Agreement simply mandates that the School District must provide notice and an opportunity for parental participation before upper-leveling class members. Once the Settlement Agreement is effective, the School District must:
(1) publish a list of all the schools within the School District that have Autistic Support classrooms, and the grade range of those classrooms, by October 15 of each year;
(2) provide two letter notices – one in January and one in June – to class members prior to transferring them; and
(3) inform parents that they can discuss the proposed transfer and their child’s needs at an IEP meeting and retain their rights to challenge their child’s individual transfer.
The Parties agreed to end the lawsuit in exchange for this Settlement Agreement. (Again, however, no individual student is waiving his or her right to file a due process complaint regarding his/her education.) Class counsel will receive a payment toward its fees, expenses and costs from the School District of $325,000. Class counsel will receive no additional fee for monitoring the Settlement Agreement.
Copies of the Settlement Agreement and Complaint in the case can be found on the website of the School District, http://www.phila.k12.pa.us/, or class counsel, www.pilcop.org. For further information about the Settlement or fairness hearing you can contact class counsel, The Public Interest Law Center at PVAutismsettlement@pilcop.org or at 215-627-7100 ext. 258.

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-2 Filed 04/15/14 Page 4 of 4
Notice to Parents of Students with Autism in the School District of Philadelphia
HOW TO OBJECT TO THIS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IF YOU THINK IT IS UNFAIR
If you do not want to object to this proposed Settlement Agreement, it is not necessary for you to do anything. If, however, you want to comment on the proposed Settlement Agreement or object to it as not being fair, you or someone on your behalf may file written comments or objections on or before ________, 2014. Written comments and objections should be submitted to this address: Office of the Clerk, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 601 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Attn: ___________.
You should also send a copy of your comments to the attorneys for each party at the addresses below:
Attorneys for Plaintiff Class: PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA c/o Sonja Kerr 1709 Benjamin Franklin Parkway, 2nd Floor Philadelphia, PA 19103 Or via email to: skerr@pilcop.org
Attorneys for the School District: SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP c/o David Smith 1600 Market Street, Suite 3600 Philadelphia, PA 19103

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-3 Filed 04/15/14 Page 1 of 3
Exhibit C

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-3 Filed 04/15/14 Page 2 of 3
January 17, 20__
VIA REGULAR MAIL Parent(s) of Class Member 1234 Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 191xx
Re: Notice of Change Dear Parent: Your child is currently in the [insert current grade] and assigned to a [insert current classroom grade range] Autistic Support (“AS”) classroom at [insert name of current school]. That school will not have an AS program available for students in grades [insert next classroom grade range] next year. If your child continues to need a supplemental level of autistic support for the next school year, your child will be assigned next year to a new school building that has a grade-appropriate AS classroom. The School District is currently in the process of determining a location. You will receive a letter in June notifying you of your child’s new school assignment. [Your child will be assigned to X building next year (if known replace previous 2 sentences)]. Please do not hesitate to contact me at [insert designee’s telephone number] regarding this transfer. You can also speak with your child’s classroom teacher regarding transition issues, or request an IEP meeting to discuss your child’s needs.
Sincerely,
[School District designee]
cc: IEP Team LEA, SEL, and Special Education Teacher

Case 2:11-cv-04027-LDD Document 114-3 Filed 04/15/14 Page 3 of 3
June 1, 20__
VIA REGULAR MAIL Parent(s) of Class Member 1234 Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 191xx
Re: Notice of Change Dear Parent: We informed you previously that your child will be assigned to a new school building next year because your child’s current school building will not have a grade-appropriate Autistic Support (“AS”) classroom for your child. Your child will be assigned to [next school building] for the 20__-__ school year. I am available to answer questions or to discuss any concerns you may have. My telephone number is [insert designee’s telephone number]. I have enclosed the “Parents’ Rights: Understanding the Procedural Safeguards Notice” pamphlet published by the Pennsylvania Department of Education Bureau of Special Education which can provide you with more information. You can call the Office for Dispute Resolution (“ODR”) at 1-800-222-3353 or any organization listed in the pamphlet for more information about mediation or to file a request for a due process hearing. If, after talking to the ODR or other organizations listed, you intend to mediate or to file for a due process hearing, please notify me at the above number as well. Sincerely,
[School District designee]
cc: IEP Team LEA, SEL and Special Education Teacher

P.V. et al v. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA et al, Docket No. 2:11-cv-04027 (E.D. Pa. Jun 20, 2011), Court Docket
General Information

Court
Federal Nature of Suit Docket Number Status

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania; United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania Civil Rights - Disabilities - Other[446] 2:11-cv-04027 CLOSED

© 2017 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Service // PAGE 39

 
 Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 1 of 14
CLOSED,SPECIAL
United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:11−cv−04027−LDD

P.V. et al v. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA et Date Filed: 06/20/2011

al

Date Terminated: 06/04/2014

Assigned to: HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS

Jury Demand: None

related Cases: 2:11−cv−04482−LDD

Nature of Suit: 446 Civil Rights:

2:13−cv−04654−ER 2:15−cv−00237−GEKP

Americans with Disabilities − Other Jurisdiction: Federal Question

Cause: 20:1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child

Plaintiff

P.V. A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS PARENTS, PEDRO VALENTIN AND YOLANDA CRUZ, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED

represented by DANIEL G. BOWERS DECHERT LLP 1775 I STREET NW SUITE 1100 WASHINGTON, DC 20006 202−261−3455 Email: daniel.bowers@dechert.com TERMINATED: 04/19/2013 LEAD ATTORNEY

SONJA D. KERR THE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILA 1709 BENJAMIN FRANKLIN PKWY 2ND FLOOR PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215−627−7100 Email: skerr@pilcop.org LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

CHERYL A. KRAUSE DECHERT LLP 2929 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 215−994−2139 Email: cheryl.krause@dechert.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DARLA D. WOODRING DECHERT LLP 2929 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 215−994−2472 Email: darla.woodring@dechert.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DAVID J. STANOCH GOLOMB & HONIK, P.C. 1515 Market Street Suite 1100 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19102 215−985−9177 Fax: 215−985−4169 Email: dstanoch@golombhonik.com ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JEFFREY W. RUBIN

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 2 of 14

DECHERT LLP CIRA CENTRE 2929 ARCH ST PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 215−994−2807 Email: jeffrey.rubin@dechert.com TERMINATED: 02/21/2012

TARA L. KELLY DECHERT LLP 2929 ARCH STREET PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104 215−994−2287 Fax: 215−994−2222 Email: tara.kelly@dechert.com TERMINATED: 02/17/2012

Plaintiff
M.M. A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS PARENT, CARLA MURPHY, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED

represented by DANIEL G. BOWERS (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/19/2013 LEAD ATTORNEY
SONJA D. KERR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

CHERYL A. KRAUSE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DARLA D. WOODRING (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DAVID J. STANOCH (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JEFFREY W. RUBIN (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/21/2012

TARA L. KELLY (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/17/2012

Plaintiff
J.V. A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS PARENTS, SHARON VARGAS AND ISMAEL VARGAS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED

represented by SONJA D. KERR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
CHERYL A. KRAUSE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DARLA D. WOODRING (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DAVID J. STANOCH (See above for address)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 3 of 14

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JEFFREY W. RUBIN (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/21/2012

TARA L. KELLY (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/17/2012

Plaintiff
R.S. A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HIS PARENTS, HEATHER SANASAC AND MATTHEW SANASAC, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED

represented by DANIEL G. BOWERS (See above for address) TERMINATED: 04/19/2013 LEAD ATTORNEY
SONJA D. KERR (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

CHERYL A. KRAUSE (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DARLA D. WOODRING (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

DAVID J. STANOCH (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

JEFFREY W. RUBIN (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/21/2012

TARA L. KELLY (See above for address) TERMINATED: 02/17/2012

V.
Defendant
THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA

represented by DAVID SMITH SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL AND LEWIS L.L.P. 1600 MARKET STREET SUITE 3600 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215−751−2190 Fax: 215−972−7409 Email: dsmith@schnader.com LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
BENJAMIN D. WANGER SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP 1600 MARKET ST STE 3600 PHILADELPHIA, PA 19103 215−751−2824 Email: bwanger@schnader.com

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 4 of 14

ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
ARLENE ACKERMAN SUPERINTENDENT, IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SUPERINTENDENT OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA

represented by DAVID SMITH (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
BENJAMIN D. WANGER (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
LINDA WILLIAMS IN HER OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS THE INTERIM DEPUTY CHIEF OF SPECIAL EDUCATION FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA

represented by DAVID SMITH (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED
BENJAMIN D. WANGER (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Defendant
THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION AS THE BOARD OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA

represented by DAVID SMITH (See above for address) LEAD ATTORNEY ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

BENJAMIN D. WANGER (See above for address) ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Date Filed 06/20/2011
06/20/2011 06/23/2011 06/23/2011 06/23/2011 07/14/2011 07/27/2011

# Docket Text
1 COMPLAINT against ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS ( Filing fee $ 350 receipt number 045165.), filed by M.M., R.S., P.V., J.V..(rt) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/21/2011: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Designation Form, # 3 Case Management Track Form) # 4 Exhibit, # 5 Exhibit) (rt). (Entered: 06/21/2011)
Summons Issued as to ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. Four Forwarded To: Counsel on June 21, 2011 (rt) (Entered: 06/21/2011)
2 NOTICE of Appearance by DARLA D. WOODRING on behalf of J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S. with Certificate of Service(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 06/23/2011)
3 NOTICE of Appearance by CHERYL A. KRAUSE on behalf of J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S. with Certificate of Service(KRAUSE, CHERYL) (Entered: 06/23/2011)
4 NOTICE of Appearance by TARA L. KELLY on behalf of J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S. with Certificate of Service(KELLY, TARA) (Entered: 06/23/2011)
5 NOTICE of Appearance by DAVID SMITH on behalf of ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS (SMITH, DAVID) (Entered: 07/14/2011)
6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by M.M., R.S., P.V., J.V. re: William Alexander served Summons and Complaint upon ARLENE ACKERMAN by Summons in a Civil Action. ARLENE ACKERMAN served on 7/6/2011, answer due 7/27/2011. (WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 07/27/2011)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 5 of 14

07/27/2011 07/27/2011
07/27/2011 07/28/2011 08/26/2011 08/26/2011 09/06/2011
09/19/2011 09/28/2011
09/30/2011 09/30/2011 09/30/2011 10/01/2011 10/01/2011 10/07/2011

7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by M.M., R.S., P.V., J.V. re: William Alexander served Summons and Complaint upon THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION by Summons in a Civil Action. THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION served on 7/6/2011, answer due 7/27/2011. (WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 07/27/2011)
8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by M.M., R.S., P.V., J.V. re: Williams Alexander served Summons and Complaint upon THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA by Summons in a Civil Action. THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA served on 7/6/2011, answer due 7/27/2011. (WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 07/27/2011)
9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by M.M., R.S., P.V., J.V. re: William Alexander served Summons and Complaint upon LINDA WILLIAMS by Service to Betty Prizill. LINDA WILLIAMS served on 7/6/2011, answer due 7/27/2011. (WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 07/27/2011)
10 Stipulation Extending Time to Answer the complaint. ARLENE ACKERMAN answer due 8/26/2011; THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA answer due 8/26/2011; THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION answer due 8/26/2011; LINDA WILLIAMS answer due 8/26/2011, with Clerk's approval. (jl, ) (Entered: 07/28/2011)
11 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A−F)(SMITH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/26/2011)
12 MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint, Class Action Allegations filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Memorandum, Certificate of Service.(SMITH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/26/2011)
13 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS WILL HAVE UNTIL AND INCLUDING 9/30/11 TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 9/6/11. 9/6/11 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 09/06/2011)
14 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Class Certification Motion filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Brief, certificate of service.(RUBIN, JEFFREY) (Entered: 09/19/2011)
15 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO MOVE FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION IS GRANTED. PLAINTIFFS SHALL FILE THEIR MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION ON OR BEFORE THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE CLOSE OF DISCOVERY IN THIS MATTER; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 9/26/11. 9/28/11 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 09/28/2011)
18 RESPONSE to Motion re 12 MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint, Class Action Allegations filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.., with CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (tomg, ) (Entered: 10/03/2011)
19 MEMORANDUM of Law in Opposition to Defendants' MOTION to Dismiss together with Certificate of Service filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S. (ti, ) (Entered: 10/03/2011)
20 EXHIBITS A AND B TO DEFENDANTS MOTIONT TO DISMISS by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.. (kk, ) (Entered: 10/03/2011)
16 RESPONSE to Motion re 12 MOTION to Strike 1 Complaint, Class Action Allegations filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Ex. A, # 2 Exhibit Ex. B)(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 10/01/2011)
17 RESPONSE in Opposition re 11 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. (WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 10/01/2011)
21 MOTION for Leave to file REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF 11 MOTION to Dismiss Complaint filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS,

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 6 of 14

10/07/2011
10/31/2011
10/31/2011
10/31/2011 10/31/2011 11/07/2011 11/09/2011 11/14/2011 11/29/2011 12/07/2011 12/09/2011 12/13/2011 12/14/2011

(REPLY BRIEF ATTACHED). (Attachments: # 1 Reply Brief in Support of Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, # 2 Text of Proposed Order)(SMITH, DAVID) Modified on 10/11/2011 (nd). Modified on 10/12/2011 (afm, ). (Entered: 10/07/2011)
22 MOTION for Leave to File Reply in Support of Defendants' Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Brief, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Brief in Support of Motion to Strike Class Action Allegations)(SMITH, DAVID) (Entered: 10/07/2011)
23 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS IS GRANTED. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 10/31/11. 10/31/11 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
24 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS IS GRANTED. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS IS DENIED. DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 10/31/11. 10/31/11 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
25 DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS. (jl, ) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
26 DEFENDANTS REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFFS CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS. (jl, ) (Entered: 10/31/2011)
27 Administrative Record. (jl, ) (Entered: 11/07/2011)
28 NOTICE of Appearance by BENJAMIN D. WANGER on behalf of ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS with Certificate of Service(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 11/09/2011)
29 ANSWER to 1 Complaint, by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS with affirmative defenses, Certificate of Service. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 11/16/2011 (nd, ). (Entered: 11/14/2011)
30 NOTICE of Hearing: RULE 16 CONFERENCE SET FOR THURSDAY, DECEMBER 15, 2011, AT 4:30 P.M. IN JUDGE CHAMBERS ROOM 6614 BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS. 11/29/2011 ENTERED, COPIES EMAILED, AND MAILED. (miah,) (Entered: 11/29/2011)
31 NOTICE of Hearing: RULE 16 CONFERENCE HAS BEEN RESCHEDULED TO TUESDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2011, AT 3:00 P.M. IN JUDGE CHAMBERS ROOM 6614 BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS. 12/7/2011 ENTERED, COPIES EMAILED, AND MAILED. (miah,) (Entered: 12/07/2011)
32 Discovery Plan by All Parties.(RUBIN, JEFFREY) (Entered: 12/09/2011)
33 Minute Entry for proceedings held before HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS: Pretrial Conference held on 12/13/11. (jl, ) (Entered: 12/13/2011)
34 SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ALL DISCOVERY SHALL CLOSE ON 5/25/12. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION SHALL BE FILED BY 6/15/12. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 6/15/12;

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 7 of 14

02/17/2012 02/17/2012 02/17/2012
02/21/2012 02/22/2012 02/22/2012
02/27/2012
03/01/2012 03/01/2012
03/05/2012 03/08/2012
03/09/2012 04/13/2012

ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 12/14/11. 12/14/11 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 12/14/2011)
35 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by TARA L. KELLY on behalf of All Plaintiffs (KELLY, TARA) (Entered: 02/17/2012)
36 NOTICE of Appearance by DAVID J. STANOCH on behalf of J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S. with Certificate of Service(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 02/17/2012)
37 MOTION to Compel The Production of Documents and Responses to Interrogatories, and Request for Expedited Briefing filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Memorandum, Certificate of Compliance, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D, # 5 Exhibit E, # 6 Exhibit F, # 7 Exhibit G, # 8 Exhibit H, # 9 Exhibit I)(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 02/17/2012)
38 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by JEFFREY W. RUBIN on behalf of All Plaintiffs (RUBIN, JEFFREY) (Entered: 02/21/2012)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 37 MOTION to Compel The Production of Documents and Responses to Interrogatories, and Request for Expedited Briefing. RESPONSES DUE BY 2/27/2012. (jl, ) (Entered: 02/22/2012)
39 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS EXPEDITED MOTION TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS IS GRANTED. ANY BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 2/27/12; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 2/22/12. 2/22/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 02/22/2012)
40 RESPONSE to Motion re 37 MOTION to Compel The Production of Documents and Responses to Interrogatories, and Request for Expedited Briefing filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit Exhibit D)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 02/27/2012)
Set/Reset Scheduling Order Deadlines: DISCOVERY DUE BY 6/11/2012. MOTIONS DUE BY 6/25/2012. (jl, ) (Entered: 03/01/2012)
41 MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION THAT PLAINTIFFS EXPEDITED MOTION TO COMPEL THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. ALL DISCOVERY SHALL CLOSE ON 6/11/12. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATIONN SHALL BE FILED BY 6/25/12. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 6/25/12; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/1/12. 3/1/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/01/2012)
42 MOTION for Clarification Plaintiffs' Motion for Minor Clarification of the Court's March 1, 2012 Order filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 03/05/2012)
43 RESPONSE to Motion re 42 MOTION for Clarification Plaintiffs' Motion for Minor Clarification of the Court's March 1, 2012 Order filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 03/08/2012)
44 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR MINOR CLARIFICATION OF THE COURT'S 3/1/12 ORDER IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/9/12.3/9/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/09/2012)
45 APPLICATION by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. FOR DANIEL G. BOWERS TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE, STATEMENT, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (FEE PAID) (jl, ) (Entered: 04/13/2012)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 8 of 14

04/19/2012 05/09/2012 07/13/2012
08/03/2012 08/03/2012 08/03/2012
08/06/2012 08/20/2012

46 AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER THAT ALL DISCOVERY, INCLUDING EXPERT DEPOSITIONS, SHALL CLOSE ON 7/6/12. PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 7/13/12. DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 8/3/12; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 4/18/12. 4/19/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 04/19/2012)
47 ORDER THAT THE APPLICATION OF DANIEL G. BOWERS TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/9/12. 5/9/12 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED, E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 05/09/2012)
48 MOTION to Certify Class Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Memorandum in Support, Proposed Order, Certificate of Service. RESPONSES DUE BY 8/3/2012. (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, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14, # 15 Exhibit 15, # 16 Exhibit 16, # 17 Exhibit 17, # 18 Exhibit 18, # 19 Exhibit 19, # 20 Exhibit 20, # 21 Exhibit 21, # 22 Exhibit 22, # 23 Exhibit 23, # 24 Exhibit 24, # 25 Exhibit 25−1, # 26 Exhibit 25−2, # 27 Exhibit 26, # 28 Exhibit 27, # 29 Exhibit 28, # 30 Exhibit 29, # 31 Exhibit 30−1, # 32 Exhibit 30−2, # 33 Exhibit 31−1, # 34 Exhibit 31−2, # 35 Exhibit 31−3, # 36 Exhibit 32, # 37 Exhibit 33)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 07/13/2012)
49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B, # 4 Exhibit C, # 5 Exhibit D, # 6 Exhibit E, # 7 Exhibit F, # 8 Exhibit G, # 9 Exhibit H, # 10 Exhibit I, # 11 Exhibit J, # 12 Exhibit K, # 13 Exhibit L, # 14 Exhibit M, # 15 Exhibit N, # 16 Exhibit O, # 17 Exhibit P, # 18 Exhibit Q, # 19 Exhibit R, # 20 Exhibit S, # 21 Exhibit T, # 22 Exhibit U, # 23 Exhibit V)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 08/03/2012)
50 Memorandum in Opposition re 48 MOTION to Certify Class Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit 22, # 24 Exhibit 23)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/6/2012 (lisad, ). (Entered: 08/03/2012)
51 MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Memorandum of Law in Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Statement of Facts, # 2 Exhibit 1, # 3 Exhibit 2, # 4 Exhibit 3, # 5 Exhibit 4, # 6 Exhibit 5, # 7 Exhibit 6, # 8 Exhibit 7, # 9 Exhibit 8, # 10 Exhibit 9, # 11 Exhibit 10, # 12 Exhibit 11, # 13 Exhibit 12, # 14 Exhibit 13, # 15 Exhibit 14, # 16 Exhibit 15, # 17 Exhibit 16, # 18 Exhibit 17, # 19 Exhibit 18, # 20 Exhibit 19, # 21 Exhibit 20, # 22 Exhibit 21, # 23 Exhibit 22, # 24 Exhibit 23, # 25 Exhibit 24, # 26 Exhibit 25, # 27 Exhibit 26, # 28 Exhibit 27, # 29 Exhibit 28, # 30 Exhibit 29, # 31 Exhibit 30, # 32 Exhibit 31, # 33 Exhibit 32, # 34 Exhibit 33, # 35 Exhibit 34−1, # 36 Exhibit 34−2, # 37 Exhibit 34−3, # 38 Exhibit 35, # 39 Exhibit 36, # 40 Exhibit 37−1, # 41 Exhibit 37−2, # 42 Exhibit 38, # 43 Exhibit 39, # 44 Exhibit 40)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/03/2012)
52 MOTION for Leave to File Joint Motion For Leave to File Replies and to Amend Briefing Schedule filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S., THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A−−Proposed Stipulated Amended Scheduling Order)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/06/2012)
53 ORDER THAT THE JOINT MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLIES AND TO AMEND BRIEFING SCHEDULE (DOC. NO. 52) IS GRANTED. AS STIPULATED THE PARTIES MAY FILE REPLY MEMORANDA ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE: PLAINTIFFS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 9 of 14

08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012 08/30/2012
09/11/2012

DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 8/30/2012. DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT SHALL BE FILED ON OR BEFORE 8/30/2012. OTHER INSTRUCTIONS ARE AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 08/20/2012.08/20/2012 ENTERED AND COPIES E−MAILED.(jmf, ) (Entered: 08/20/2012)
54 RESPONSE in Opposition re 51 MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Response to Undisputed Facts, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
55 EXHIBIT 1 to 5 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 2, # 2 Exhibit 3, # 3 Exhibit 4, # 4 Exhibit 5)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (md). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
56 EXHIBIT 6 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (nd, ). Modified on 8/30/2012 (md). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
57 EXHIBIT 7 to 8 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 8)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (md). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
58 EXHIBIT 9 to 11 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 10, # 2 Exhibit 11)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (nd, ). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
59 EXHIBIT 12 to 14 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 13, # 2 Exhibit 14)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (nd, ). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
60 EXHIBIT 15 to 18 to 54 Response in Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 16, # 2 Exhibit 17, # 3 Exhibit 18)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 8/30/2012 (nd, ). (Entered: 08/30/2012)
61 RESPONSE in Support re 48 MOTION to Certify Class Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification Reply Memorandum in Further Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 34, # 2 Exhibit 35, # 3 Exhibit 36, # 4 Exhibit 37, # 5 Exhibit 38, # 6 Exhibit 39, # 7 Exhibit 40, # 8 Exhibit 41, # 9 Exhibit 42, # 10 Exhibit 43, # 11 Exhibit 44, # 12 Exhibit 45)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
62 Memorandum In Opposition re 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. (Attachments: # 1 Response to Statement of Material Facts, # 2 Exhibit 41, # 3 Exhibit 42, # 4 Exhibit 43, # 5 Exhibit 44, # 6 Exhibit 45, # 7 Exhibit 46, # 8 Exhibit 47, # 9 Exhibit 48, # 10 Exhibit 49, # 11 Exhibit 50, # 12 Exhibit 51, # 13 Exhibit 52, # 14 Exhibit 53, # 15 Exhibit 54)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 08/30/2012)
63 REPLY in Further Support of the 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS, Certificate of Service.

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 10 of 14

09/11/2012 09/20/2012
09/27/2012 09/27/2012 10/05/2012 10/09/2012 10/11/2012 10/11/2012 02/19/2013 02/19/2013
02/19/2013

(Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit Exhibit 2)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 9/13/2012 (fh) (Entered: 09/11/2012)
64 Reply Memorandum in Further Support of PLAINTIFFS' 51 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S., Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 55, # 2 Exhibit 56, # 3 Exhibit 57, # 4 Exhibit 58, # 5 Exhibit 59, # 6 Exhibit 60)(STANOCH, DAVID) Modified on 9/13/2012 (fh) (Entered: 09/11/2012)
65 MOTION for Leave to File Surreply to Plaintiffs' Reply Brief in Support of their Motion for Summary Judgment filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Memorandum, Brief, Affidavit, Declaration, Certificate of Counsel or Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Exhibit 1 − Surreply, # 2 Text of Proposed Order Proposed Order)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 09/20/2012)
66 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SURREPLY IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 9/27/12. 9/27/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Main Document 66 replaced on 9/28/2012) (afm, ). (Entered: 09/27/2012)
67 SURREPLY OF DEFENDANTS ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT. (jl, ) (Entered: 09/27/2012)
68 NOTICE by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS re 49 MOTION for Summary Judgment Notice of Supplemental Authority (Attachments: # 1 Supplement)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 10/05/2012)
69 MOTION for Leave to File Plainitiffs' Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum of Law to Address Defendants' Notice of Supplemental Authority, and in Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A)(STANOCH, DAVID) (Entered: 10/09/2012)
70 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF LAW TO ADDRESS DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 10/9/12. 10/11/12 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 10/11/2012)
71 PLAINTIFFS' SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF LAW TO ADDRESS DEFENDANTS NOTICE SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY AND IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE. (jl, ) (Entered: 10/11/2012)
72 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 2/19/13. 2/19/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
73 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION IS GRANTED. THIS ACTION IS CERTIFIED AS A CLASS ACTION PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 23 (a) AND 23 (b)(2). THE PUBLIC INTEREST LAW CENTER OF PHILADELPHIA AND DECHERT LLP ARE APPOINTED AS CLASS COUNSEL; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 2/19/13. 2/19/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
74 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 2/19/13. 2/19/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 02/19/2013)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 11 of 14

02/19/2013
02/27/2013 03/01/2013 03/06/2013 03/13/2013 03/15/2013 03/18/2013
03/20/2013 03/21/2013
03/21/2013 03/25/2013 04/18/2013 04/19/2013 04/25/2013

75 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO CLOSE THIS MATTER FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES; ETC. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 2/19/13. 2/19/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 02/19/2013)
76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), filed by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA.Memorandum, Certificate of Service. (Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order, # 2 Exhibit A, # 3 Exhibit B)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 02/27/2013)
77 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion For Attorney's Fees and Costs filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Motion and Memorandum.(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 03/01/2013)
78 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO MOVE FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS IS GRANTED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/6/13.3/6/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/06/2013)
79 RESPONSE in Opposition re 76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2)(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 03/13/2013)
80 SUGGESTION OF DEATH Upon the Record as to Arlene Ackerman by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 03/15/2013)
81 ORDER THAT COUNSEL SHALL APPEAR AT 2:00 P.M. ON 4/16/13 FOR ORAL ARGUMENT ON THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA'S OUTSTANDING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/18/13. 3/18/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/18/2013)
82 MOTION for Leave to File Reply Brief in Support of Motion for Reconsideration filed by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS.Certificate of Service.(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 03/20/2013)
83 ORDER THAT DEFENDANT'S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND TO ALTER OR AMENDED JUDDGMENT IS GRANTED. DEFENDANT MUST FILE ITS REPLY BRIEF ON OR BEFORE 3/25/13; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/20/13. 3/21/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/21/2013)
Set/Reset Deadlines as to 76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), . REPLIES DUE BY 3/25/2013. (md) (Entered: 03/22/2013)
84 REPLY Brief in Support re 76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), filed by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 3/26/2013 (lisad, ). (Entered: 03/25/2013)
85 Minute Entry for proceedings held before HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS: Motion Hearing held on 4/16/13 re 76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), filed by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA Court Reporter: DONNA CROCE. (jl, ) (Entered: 04/18/2013)
86 NOTICE of Withdrawal of Appearance by DANIEL G. BOWERS on behalf of J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S.(BOWERS, DANIEL) (Entered: 04/19/2013)
87 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on 4/16/13 before Judge DAVIS. Court Reporter: DONNA CROCE. ORAL ARGUMENT (jl, ) (Entered: 04/25/2013)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 12 of 14

05/02/2013
05/13/2013 05/22/2013 05/23/2013
05/23/2013 05/29/2013 06/03/2013 06/07/2013
06/27/2013 08/01/2013 08/07/2013 08/12/2013 08/14/2013

88 ORDER THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT LETTER REQUESTING AN EXTENSION OF TIME IS GRANTED. ACCORDINGLY, THE PARTIES SHALL, IN WRITING, UPDATE THIS COURT AS TO THE STATUS OF THE PARTIES EFFORTS TO REACH AN AGREEMENT ON THE ISSUES IN THIS LITIGATION NO LATER THAN 6/5/13; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/1/13. 5/2/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 05/02/2013)
89 NOTICE by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS re 76 MOTION for Reconsideration re 75 Order (Memorandum and/or Opinion), of Supplemental Authority (SMITH, DAVID) (Entered: 05/13/2013)
90 MOTION for Leave to File Memorandum of Law filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Memorandum of Law. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A (Memorandum of Law))(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 05/22/2013)
91 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF LAW IS GRANTED. THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO FILE PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM (DOC. 90−1) AS A REPLY BRIEF IN THIS CASE.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/23/13. 5/23/13 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, ) (Entered: 05/23/2013)
92 PLAINTIFFS SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN RESPONSETO DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY IN SUPPORTOF DEFENDANTS OF MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE(rf, ) (Entered: 05/23/2013)
93 REPLY to Response to Motion re 90 MOTION for Leave to File Memorandum of Law filed by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A −− Reply Brief)(WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 05/29/2013)
94 AMENDED TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on 4/16/13 before Judge DAVIS. Court Reporter: DONNA CROCE. ORAL ARGUMENT (jl, ) (Entered: 06/03/2013)
95 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFF'S LETTER REQUESTING AN ADDITIONAL THREE WEEKS FOR THE PARTIES TO RESUME THEIR EFFORTS TO RESOLVE THIS MATTER IS GRANTED. THE PARTIES SHALL, IN WRITING, UPDATE THIS COURT AS TO THE STATUS OF THE PARTIES EFFORTS TO REACH AN AGREEMENT OF THE ISSUES IN THIS LITIGATION NO LATER THAN 6/26/13; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 6/6/13. 6/7/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 06/07/2013)
96 ORDER THAT THE PARTIES SHALL, IN WRITING, UPDATE THIS COURT AS TO THE STATUS OF THE PARTIES EFFORTS TO REACH AN AGREEMENT ON THE ISSUES IN THIS LITIGATION NO LATER THAN 7/26/13; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 6/27/13. 6/27/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 06/27/2013)
97 ORDER THAT A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE IS SCHEDULED FOR 8/14/13 AT 9:30 A.M.; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/1/13. 8/1/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 08/01/2013)
98 ORDER THAT THE SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE IS RESCHEDULED FOR 8/9/13 AT 9:30 A.M.. THE DOCUMENTS PREVIOUSLY DUE ON 8/9/13, ARE DUE NO LATER THAN 8/8/13 AT 5:00 P.M.; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/7/13. 8/7/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 08/07/2013)
99 Minute Entry for proceedings held before HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS: Settlement Conference held on 8/9/2013. (jmg, ) (Entered: 08/12/2013)
100 ORDER THAT THE CLERK OF COURT IS HEREBY DIRECTED TO RE−OPEN THIS MATTER TO PERMIT DETERMINATION OF THE APPROPRIATE AND SPECIFIC CONTOURS OF INJUNCTIVE RELIEF IN THIS MATTER; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/14/13. 8/14/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 08/14/2013)

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 13 of 14

08/14/2013 08/14/2013
08/23/2013 08/26/2013
10/21/2013
11/15/2013
12/11/2013 12/31/2013
01/15/2014 02/21/2014 03/04/2014 03/27/2014 03/31/2014 03/31/2014

101 ORDER THAT DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IS DENIED; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/14/13. 8/14/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 08/14/2013)
102 ORDER THAT ON OR BEFORE 10/15/13, THE PARTIES SHALL PROVIDE TO THIS COURT IN WRITING A STATUS UPDATE, INDICATING WHETHER THE PARTIES HAVE REACHED A SETTLEMENT IN THIS CASE; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/14/13. 8/14/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 08/14/2013)
103 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Memorandum.(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 08/23/2013)
104 ORDER THAT PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO MOVE FOR ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS(DOC. NO. 103) IS GRANTED. OTHER INSTRUCTIONS ARE AS OUTLINED HEREIN. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 8/26/2013.8/26/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E−MAILED.(jmg, ) (Entered: 08/26/2013)
105 ORDER THAT ON OR BEFORE 11/14/13, THE PARTIES SHALL INFORM THE COURT IN WRITING WHETHER THE PARTIES HAVE REACHED A SETTLEMENT IN THIS CASE; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 10/18/13. 10/21/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 10/21/2013)
106 ORDERED THAT THE CLERK SHALL REFER THIS MATTER TO THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY RICE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, FOR A SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 11/15/13. 11/15/13 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 11/15/2013)
107 NOTICE of Hearing: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SET FOR 12/30/2013 AT 1:30 P.M., IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE TIMOTHY R. RICE.(cms) (Entered: 12/11/2013)
108 ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITH PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 41.1(b). THIS COURT SHALL RETAIN JURISDICTION OVER THIS MATTER THROUGH MONDAY, JANUARY 2, 2017, FOR PURPOSES OF ENFORCING THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THIS MATTER SHALL CONTINUE TO BE REFERRED TO THE HONORABLE TIMOTHY R. RICE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS MATTER CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 12/31/2013. 12/31/2013 ENTERED AND COPIES E−MAILED. (miah, ) (VACATED PER ORDER 116 ) (Entered: 12/31/2013)
109 NOTICE of Hearing: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE RESET FOR 1/27/2014 AT 9:30 A.M., IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE TIMOTHY R. RICE.(cms) (Entered: 01/15/2014)
110 NOTICE of Hearing: SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE RESET FOR 2/28/2014 AT 1:30 P.M., IN JUDGE'S CHAMBERS BEFORE MAGISTRATE JUDGE TIMOTHY R. RICE.(cms) (Entered: 02/21/2014)
111 Minute Entry for proceedings held before MAGISTRATE JUDGE TIMOTHY R. RICE: Settlement Conference held on 2/28/14. (jl, ) (Entered: 03/04/2014)
112 Joint MOTION to Vacate 108 Order Dismissing Case − 41(b), filed by THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA.Memorandum, Brief, Affidavit, Declaration, Certificate of Counsel or Certificate of Service.(WANGER, BENJAMIN) Modified on 4/3/2014 (afm, ). (Entered: 03/27/2014)
Set/Reset Scheduling Order Deadlines: MOTIONS DUE BY 4/14/2014. (jl, ) (Entered: 03/31/2014)
113 ORDER THAT, ON OR BEFORE 4/14/14, THE PARTIES SHALL EITHER (A) SUBMIT THEIR PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, OR (B)JOINTLY ADVISE THE COURT IN

Case: 2:11-cv-4027 As of: 10/27/2017 01:25 AM EDT 14 of 14

04/15/2014 05/06/2014 05/06/2014 05/12/2014
05/28/2014
06/03/2014 06/03/2014 06/03/2014 06/04/2014
07/10/2014

WRITING OF THE STATUS OF THIS MATTER; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 3/31/14. 3/31/14 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 03/31/2014)
114 Joint MOTION for Settlement Approval filed by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S..Memorandum. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C)(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 04/15/2014)
Set/Reset Hearings: MISCELLANEOUS HEARING SET FOR 6/3/2014 09:30 AM BEFORE HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS. (jl, ) (Entered: 05/06/2014)
115 ORDER THAT THE PARTIES JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS APPROVED. A HEARING TO DETERMINE IF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS FAIR REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE SHALL BE HELD ON 6/3/14 AT 9:30 A.M.; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/6/14. 5/6/14 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 05/06/2014)
116 ORDER THAT UPON CONSIDERATION OF THE PARTIES' JOINT MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL TO CONSIDER CLASS SETTLEMENT 112 , IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE MOTION IS GRANTED. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED THAT THE CLERK OF COURT'S ORDER DATED 12/31/2013 108 IS VACATED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/12/14.5/12/14 ENTERED AND COPIES E−MAILED.(ti, ) (Entered: 05/12/2014)
117 ORDER AND NOTICE THAT THE COURT HAVING RECEIVED PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR GUIDANCE AS TO WHETHER THE COURT ANTICIPATES BRIEF STATEMENTS FROM THE ATTORNEYS AND CLASS MEMBERS OR PREFERS THE PARTIES TO ELICIT FORMAL TESTIMONY FROM CLASS MEMBER WITNESS AT THE FAIRNESS HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 6/3/14. WE EXPECT THAT BRIEF STATEMENTS WILL BE SUFFICIENT. THE COURT WILL ALSO HEAR ANY TESTIMONY THAT COUNSEL WITH TO PRESENT. WE LEAVE THE DECISION OF HOW TO PROCEED TO COUNSEL'S PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 5/28/14. 5/28/14 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 05/28/2014)
118 Declaration of Benjamin Wanger re Compliance with Terms of Settlement Agreement by ARLENE ACKERMAN, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PHILADELPHIA, THE SCHOOL REFORM COMMISSION, LINDA WILLIAMS. (WANGER, BENJAMIN) (Entered: 06/03/2014)
119 EXHIBIT 1−4 by J.V., M.M., P.V., R.S... (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 2 from 6/3/14 fairness hearing, # 2 Exhibit 3 from 6/3/14 fairness hearing, # 3 Exhibit 4 from 6/3/14 fairness hearing)(WOODRING, DARLA) (Entered: 06/03/2014)
120 Minute Entry for proceedings held before HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS: HEARING TO DETERMINE IF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS FAIR, REASONABLE AND ADEQUATE held on 6/3/14. Court Reporter: DONNA CROCE. (jl, ) (Entered: 06/03/2014)
121 ORDER THAT THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT, SET FORTH IN THE PARTIES SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT IS APPROVED. THE COURT ALSO FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED PAYMENT OF $325,000 IN ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSES TO PLAINTIFFS IS REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE. PLAINTIFFS CLAIMS ARE DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL MARK THIS MATTER CLOSED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE LEGROME D. DAVIS ON 6/3/14. 6/4/14 ENTERED AND E−MAILED.(jl, ) (Entered: 06/04/2014)
122 TRANSCRIPT of Proceedings held on 6/3/14 before Judge DAVIS. Court Reporter: DONNA CROCE. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT HEARING (jl, ) (Entered: 07/10/2014)