Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_00-cv-02475/USCOURTS-casd-3_00-cv-02475-0/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

27

28

- 1 - 00cv2475 WQH (CAB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CLAUDIA HOUSTON, CASSANDRA

HOUSTON and BRITTANY HOUSTON,

Plaintiffs,

CASE NO. 00cv2475 WQH (CAB)

ORDER

vs.

GOVERNING BOARD OF THE

ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT,

et al.,

Defendants.

HAYES, Judge:

On January 29, 2008, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit entered judgment in this case

affirming in part, vacating in part and remanding. (Doc. # 169). This Court now has jurisdiction. 

On December 13, 2000, Plaintiffs initiated this action by filing the Complaint. (Doc. # 1). 

On March 25, 2004, after granting Plaintiffs leave to amend their Complaint four times, this Court

dismissed the Fourth Amended Complaint with prejudice with respect to the claims filed by Plaintiff

Claudia Houston and without prejudice with respect to the claims filed by Plaintiffs Casandra and

Brittany Houston. (Doc. # 122). The Court found that Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative

remedies as required by IDEA, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., and the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §§

791 et seq, and failed to substantiate their claims that exhaustion would be futile. Id. at 10. 

Plaintiffs appealed the Court’s March 25, 2004 Order dismissing the Fourth Amended

Complaint to the Ninth Circuit. (Doc. # 125). On January 28, 2008, the Ninth Circuit affirmed in

part, vacated in part, and remanded. (Doc. # 169). The Ninth Circuit held that this Court “properly

Case 3:00-cv-02475-WQH-CAB Document 170 Filed 02/28/08 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

27

28

- 2 - 00cv2475 WQH (CAB)

dismissed appellants’ claims under IDEA and the Rehabilitation Act because they failed to exhaust

administrative due process procedures or substantiate their claims that exhaustion was futile.” Id. at

2. However, the Ninth Circuit held that this Court “should have dismissed Claudia Houston’s federal

claims without prejudice.” Id. The Ninth Circuit stated: “Accordingly, we vacate the district court’s

judgment to the extent it dismissed Claudia Houston’s federal claims with prejudice, and remand for

entry of judgment dismissing the entire action without prejudice.” Id. at 3. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the entire action is DISMISSED without prejudice. The

Court directs the Clerk of the Court to enter Judgment against the Plaintiffs and in favor of the

Defendants. 

DATED: February 28, 2008

WILLIAM Q. HAYES

United States District Judge

Case 3:00-cv-02475-WQH-CAB Document 170 Filed 02/28/08 Page 2 of 2