(a) A complainant may file a civil action following the exhaustion of administrative remedies under the Act. Administrative remedies are exhausted if—
(1) One hundred eighty days have elapsed since the complainant filed the complaint with ED, and ED has made no finding with regard to the complaint; or
(2) ED issues any finding in favor of the recipient.
(b) If ED fails to make a finding within 180 days or issues a finding in favor of the recipient, ED promptly—
(1) Advises the complainant of this fact;
(2) Advises the complainant of his or her right to bring a civil action for injunctive relief; and
(3) Informs the complainant—
(i) That a civil action can be brought only in a United States district court for the district in which the recipient is found or transacts business;
(ii) That a complainant prevailing in a civil action has the right to be awarded the costs of the action, including reasonable attorney's fees, but that these costs must be demanded in the complaint filed with the court;
(iii) That before commencing the action, the complainant shall give 30 days notice by registered mail to the Secretary, the Secretary of Health and Human Services, the Attorney General of the United States, and the recipient;
(iv) That the notice shall state the alleged violation of the Act, the relief requested, the court in which the action will be brought, and whether or not attorney's fees are demanded in the event the complainant prevails; and
(v) That the complainant may not bring an action if the same alleged violation of the Act by the same recipient is the subject of a pending action in any court of the United States.
(Authority: 42 U.S.C. 6104)
Notes of Decisions
Parker v. Bd. of Supervisors Univ., 270 F. App'x 314 (5th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 4× “§ 6104 (f) and 34 C.F.R. § 110.39 . 1 Parker did not appeal the decision in that first case.”
Grant v. Alperovich, 703 F. App'x 556 (9th Cir. 2017).
“§ 6104 (e)(1) & (2); 34 C.F.R. § 110.39 . Neither the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act nor the statutes criminalizing health care fraud provide a private right of action.”
D.A. v. Houston Indep. Sch. Dist., 716 F. Supp. 2d 603 (S.D. Tex. 2009).
“§ 6104 (f); 34 C.F.R. § 110.39 ). The Fifth Circuit has summarized the exhaustion requirements as follows: (1) the plaintiff must have filed an age discrimination complaint with OCR; (2) either 180 days must have elapsed with no finding, or OCR must have issued a finding in…”
Grant v. Alperovich, 993 F. Supp. 2d 1356 (W.D. Wash. 2014).
“34 C.F.R. § 110.39 (a). Defendants argue that Plaintiffs claims must be dismissed because she has not exhausted her administrative remedies.”
Parker v. Bd. of Supervisors Univ. of Louisiana-Lafayette, 335 F. App'x 465 (5th Cir. 2009).
“Notice must also be sent to the United States Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), as required by 34 C.F.R. § 110.39 (b)(3)(iii). Parker contends that his proposed amended complaint will cure the defects in his original complaint by pleading that several…”
Parker v. Univ of LA Lafayette, 296 F. App'x 414 (5th Cir. 2008).
· cites it 10× “§ 6104 (e) — (f); 34 C.F.R. § 110.39 . In attempting to demonstrate that he met the statute’s prerequisites, Parker submitted to the district court an explanatory memorandum with attached exhibits.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.