Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01071/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01071-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 20:1400 Civil Rights of Handicapped Child

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J.M., a minor, by and through

her parents, J.M. and D.M.,

NO. CIV. S-07-1071 LKK/GGH 

Plaintiffs,

v.

O R D E R

VACAVILLE UNIFIED SCHOOL

DISTRICT,

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, a minor, brings suit through her parents against

defendant, the Vacaville Unified School District (“District”), for

injunctive relief. On June 7, 2007, this court issued a

preliminary injunction enjoining the District from graduating

plaintiff. Pending before the court is defendant’s motion to

dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court

resolves the matter upon the parties’ papers and after oral

argument. For the reasons set forth below, the motion to dismiss

is DENIED.

////

Case 2:07-cv-01071-LKK -GGH Document 17 Filed 08/15/07 Page 1 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

I. Facts

Plaintiff is an 18-year-old student currently eligible for

special education under the category of specific learning

disability. See Compl. ¶ 9. On December 12, 2006, plaintiff filed

a complaint with the Special Education Division of the Office of

Administrative Hearings (“OAH”), alleging that the District failed

to offer her a free appropriate public education (“FAPE”) pursuant

to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) and

state law. Pl.’s OAH Due Process Request, Ex. A, Pl.’s Mot. for

TRO. On April 30, 2007, plaintiff brought a motion for a stay put

order before OAH pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1415(j), requesting that

plaintiff remain in her present placement pending the completion

of the due process hearing procedures. Pl.’s OAH Mot. for Stay

Put, Ex. H, Pl.’s Mot. for TRO. OAH denied plaintiff’s motion for

stay put order on May 11, 2007 because the motion was premature

absent written notice from the District that it intended to change

her educational placement by graduating her. OAH Denial of Stay

Put, Ex. D, Pl.’s Mot. for TRO. 

On June 1, 2007, the District informed plaintiff’s parents

that the District would graduate plaintiff on June 8, 2007. Compl.

¶¶ 45-47. Plaintiff asked OAH for leave to file an amended due

process hearing request and for a stay put order on June 4, 2007

based on the District’s June 1, 2007 notification that plaintiff

would graduate. Pl.’s OAH Mot. for Leave to Amend First Am. Compl.

& Mot. for Stay Put, Ex. E & G, Pl.’s Mot. for TRO. OAH indicated

to plaintiff that it would not issue a stay put order in time to

Case 2:07-cv-01071-LKK -GGH Document 17 Filed 08/15/07 Page 2 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

prevent the District from graduating plaintiff. Compl. ¶ 54. 

Based on this information, plaintiff filed a complaint with

this court on June 5, 2007 for injunctive relief to prevent

defendant from graduating her, as well as a motion for a temporary

restraining order for the same purpose. Compl. ¶ 54. After oral

argument on the matter, the court issued a preliminary injunction

on June 7, 2007, enjoining the District from graduating plaintiff.

J.M. v. Vacaville Unified Sch. Dist., No. 07-CV-1071, slip op. at

2. On June 19, 2007, OAH granted plaintiff’s motion to amend the

due process complaint and issued a stay put order. See OAH Order

Granting Mot. to Amend Compl. & Mot. for Stay Put, Ex. A, Def.’s

Mot. to Dismiss. The OAH stay put order states: “Student shall

remain in her current educational placement pending a resolution

of the complaint.” Id. The due process hearing is scheduled for

October 15-19 and 22-24, 2007. See OAH Order Setting Due Process

Hearing and Pre-hearing Conference, Ex. B, Def.’s Mot. to Dismiss.

II.

Analysis

Defendant moves to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiff

received the relief she sought in filing her complaint, namely, an

injunction preventing the school from changing her special

education placement by graduating her. See Compl. ¶¶ 53-55. 

Defendant’s position, however, fails to account for the plain

language of the preliminary injunction, which provides that the

injunction, “last only so long as necessary for the Office of

Administrative Hearings to resolve and dispose of plaintiff’s

Case 2:07-cv-01071-LKK -GGH Document 17 Filed 08/15/07 Page 3 of 4
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

4

underlying due process complaint and request for a ‘stay put’

order.” Id. Although a stay–put order was issued on June 19,

2007, plaintiff’s underlying due process complaint has yet to be

resolved. The hearing on plaintiff’s due process complaint is

scheduled for October 15-19 and 22-24, 2007. See OAH Order Setting

Due Process Hearing and Pre-hearing Conference, Ex. B, Def.’s Mot.

to Dismiss. Once the OAH renders its decision on plaintiff’s due

process complaint, the preliminary injunction will expire. Until

that point, the preliminary injunction shall remain in effect and

accordingly, the court will retain jurisdiction of the case.

The arguments raised in defendant’s motion are not necessarily

without merit. Once the preliminary injunction expires, the

District may file a renewed motion to dismiss for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction or for failure to exhaust administrative

remedies. However, because the hearing on plaintiff’s due process

claim has yet to occur, and because the injunction has yet to

expire, defendant’s arguments are premature.

For these reasons, defendant’s motion to dismiss is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: August 15, 2007.

Case 2:07-cv-01071-LKK -GGH Document 17 Filed 08/15/07 Page 4 of 4