C.F.R. » Title 34 » CHAPTER III—OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION › PART 303—EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAM FOR INFANTS AND TODDLERS WITH DISABILITIES › Subpart E—Procedural Safeguards

34 C.F.R. § 303.440

Filing a due process complaint

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) General. (1) A parent, EIS provider, or a lead agency may file a due process complaint on any of the matters described in § 303.421(a), relating to the identification, evaluation, or placement of a child, or the provision of early intervention services to the infant or toddler with a disability and his or her family under part C of the Act.

(2) The due process complaint must allege a violation that occurred not more than two years before the date the parent or EIS provider knew, or should have known, about the alleged action that forms the basis of the due process complaint, or, if the State has an explicit time limitation for filing a due process complaint under this part, in the time allowed by that State law, except that the exceptions to the timeline described in § 303.443(f) apply to the timeline in this section.

(b) Information for parents. The lead agency must inform the parent of any free or low-cost legal and other relevant services available in the area if—

(1) The parent requests the information; or

(2) The parent or EIS provider files a due process complaint under this section.

(c) Timeline for Resolution. The lead agency may adopt a 30- or 45-day timeline, subject to § 303.447(a), for the resolution of due process complaints and must specify in its written policies and procedures under § 303.123 and in its prior written notice under § 303.421, the specific timeline it has adopted.

(Approved by Office of Management and Budget under control number 1820-NEW) (Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1415(b)(6), 1439)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2016–2018 · leading case: W.R. v. State of Ohio Health Dep't, 651 F. App'x 514 (6th Cir. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
W.R. v. State of Ohio Health Dep't, 651 F. App'x 514 (6th Cir. 2016). “Regulations require that non-IDEA claims under Part C be exhausted if they “seek[] relief that is also available under [Part B].” 34 C.F.R. § 303.”
Nicola Ruhl v. State of Ohio Health Dep't (6th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “” 34 C.F.R. § 303.440 . Ohio regulations likewise provide a two-year statute of limitations for administrative complaints under IDEA Part C.”
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.