IN THE PENNSYLVANIA OFFICE FOR DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Sufficiency Determination and Dismissal
ODR File No. 2816-1112AS
Child’s Name: J.B.1 Date of Birth: [redacted]
Parties Parent
Schuylkill Intermediate Unit 29 17 Maple Avenue
PO Box 130
Mar Lin, PA 17951-0130
Representative
Koert Wehberg, Esquire
Gabe Labella, Esquire
Disability Rights Network of Pennsylvania 1315 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19107
Karl Romberger, Esquire
Sweet Stevens Katz and Williams, LLP 331 East Butler Avenue
New Britain, PA 18901
Date of Decision: February 14, 2012
Hearing Officer: Brian Jason Ford
Introduction
Before me is the [redacted] (IU’s) Sufficiency Challenge. The Sufficiency Challenge is somewhat unusual in that the IU argues that it is not the Student’s local educational agency (LEA). For reasons set forth herein, I find that the IU is not the Student’s LEA and dismiss the instant matter for that reason.
Procedural History
The Parent filed a single complaint against both the IU and [School District A] on January 26, 2012. When a complaint names two respondents, the Office for Dispute Resolution (ODR) treats the situation as if two identical complaints have been filed. The instant matter, ODR No. 2816-1112AS, the IU is the only respondent. [School District A] is the only respondent in ODR No. 2782-1112AS.
The IU filed its sufficiency challenge on February 9, 2012.
J-B-Schuylkill-Intermediate-Unit-29-ODRNo-2816-1112AS