M.P.

MEMORANDUM

M.P., by and through his parents, appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the Anchorage School District (“the ASD”) and its dismissal of M.P.’s claims that the ASD violated the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”).

The district court concluded that the ASD did not deny M.P. a FAPE because M.P.’s parents failed to cooperate with the ASD in the preparation of a new individualized educational program (“IEP”) for M.P. In so concluding, the district court did not address whether M.P. actually received a FAPE. That was error. Neither the IDEA nor its implementing regulations qualifies any duty imposed on a state or local educational agency as contingent upon parental cooperation. Further, the ASD does not cite any binding case law, and we are not aware of any, that supports such a proposition.

Although the district court did not address whether the ASD provided M.P. with a substantively adequate FAPE, there is no need to remand this issue. The record was fully developed before the hearing officer, our review is de novo, and whether M.P. received a FAPE is ultimately a legal question because the ASD challenges the hearing officer’s…