Cooper

MEMORANDUM *

Hermond Dean Cooper appeals the judgment of the district court dismissing his case following the court’s grant of sum *363 mary judgment in favor of defendant, the Pasadena Unified School District (“PUSD”). We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse in part and affirm in part.

We reverse the district court’s dismissal of Cooper’s claims brought under § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (“RA”), 29 U.S.C. § 794 . 1 PUSD’s argument that Cooper did not include RA claims in his third amended complaint is disingenuous. Cooper clearly incorporated paragraph twenty in his third and fourth causes of action, and paragraph twenty, in turn, incorporates paragraphs one through nineteen. Paragraph two invokes the jurisdiction of the district court under the RA. Moreover, as a pro se plaintiff, Cooper is to be afforded the benefit of any doubt. Morrison v. Hall, 261 F.3d 896 , 899 n. 2 (9th Cir.2001). The complaint is sufficient to put PUSD on notice that Cooper was making claims under the RA. See id. Because California has waived its sovereign immunity under the RA by accepting federal RA funds, Douglas v. Cal. Dep’t of Youth Auth., 271 F.3d 812, 820 (9th…