Eric Rodriguez v. San Mateo Union High School District

Good Law
357 F. App'x 752
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 13, 200908-16759California551 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs Eric Rodriguez and his mother Kimberlin Rodriguez appeal the district court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the defendant San Mateo Union High School District (“School District”) and dismissing plaintiffs’ claims that were brought under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”).

Appellants first contend that the district failed to provide Eric with a Free Appropriate Public Education (“FAPE”) while he attended the high school. Appellants argue that the School District was required to conduct a behavioral intervention plan (“BIP”) as defined by CaLCode Regs. tit. V, § 3001(g). The ALJ found that Eric’s behavior did not constitute a “serious behavior problem” as defined in the regulations, and therefore a BIP was not required. See Cal.Code Regs. tit. V, §§ 3001(g), (ab). The record reflects that Erie’s behavioral problems did not rise to the level of severity necessary to trigger the need for a BIP. He did not cause harm or a serious threat of harm to persons or property and plaintiffs do not document other circumstances that would satisfy the regulation’s requirements. Appellants also contend that Eric was denied a FAPE when the speech…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.