Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02136/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-02136-8/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 20:1401 Education: Handicapped Child Act

---

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

 On April 13, 2007, plaintiffs filed a letter stating they never received the February 6, 1

2007 order granting the motion of their counsel to withdraw and directing plaintiffs to inform the

court of the name of their new counsel or their intent to proceed in pro se; plaintiffs state, and the

docket confirms, that service of the order was made electronically only upon counsel. However,

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

J.R., a minor, by and through

his parents W.R. and N.R.,

and W.R. and N.R., individually,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-06-2136 LKK GGH PS

vs.

SYLVAN UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT

OF EDUCATION in its supervisory

capacity, the CALIFORNIA OFFICE ORDER

OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS, and

DR. JOHN HALVERSON, in his

official capacity as superintendent

for SYLVAN UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendants.

 /

On April 4, 2007, the District Judge referred this case to the undersigned for case

management pursuant to E. D. Cal. L. R. 72-302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The referral

was made two months after the District Judge granted, on February 6, 2007, the motion of

plaintiffs’ counsel to withdraw, thus permitting plaintiffs an opportunity to retain new counsel. 

1

Case 2:06-cv-02136-LKK -GGH Document 74 Filed 06/01/07 Page 1 of 2
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

plaintiffs attach a February 5, 2006 email from former counsel informing them of the court’s

decision. Plaintiffs have asked that all future correspondence from the court be sent to their

mailing address.

2

On April 24, 2007, this court stayed these proceedings pending the U.S. Supreme

Court’s decision in Winkelman v. Parma City School District, 127 S.Ct. 1994 (2007). On May

21, 2007, the Court held that the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”) grants

parents independent and enforceable rights they may litigate pro se in federal court. Since these

rights are coterminous with the rights of the child, the court found it unnecessary to reach the

question whether IDEA entitles parents to litigate their child’s claims pro se. Id. Unlike the

common law rule precluding a parent from representing their child pro se, Johns v. County of

San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997), Winkelman enables plaintiff parents herein to

pursue this action without counsel. 

The District Judge’s referral order vacated a status conference scheduled for April

9, 2007, pursuant to which the hearing on defendants’ motions to dismiss, previously set for

March 12, 2007, was to be rescheduled. These motions are still pending although plaintiffs have

yet to file an opposition.

Accordingly, the hearing on defendants’ motions to dismiss, filed November 30,

2006 by the State of California, Sylvan Union School District and Superintendent Halverson, and

December 1, 2006 by the Office of Administrative Hearings, is hereby rescheduled for Thursday,

August 9, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 24. Plaintiffs’ opposition shall be filed on or

before Monday, July 16, 2007. Defendants’ replies, if any, shall be filed on or before Monday,

July 30, 2007. 

 So ordered.

DATED: 6/1/07 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

___________________________

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

 U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH5:Sylv2136.ord

Case 2:06-cv-02136-LKK -GGH Document 74 Filed 06/01/07 Page 2 of 2