Nadar et al v. Bentonville School District et al

Filing 14

ORDER granting 9 defendants' motion to dismiss; and plaintiffs' amended complaint 6 is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 10/14/2014. (ljb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
ARVINTHAN NADAR and PREMA
THANGAVEL, as Parents of Child Doe
v.

PLAINTIFFS

CASE NO: 4:14CV363 BSM

BENTONVILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT; TONY WOOD,
and the ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
EDUCATION

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The motion filed by defendants Tony Wood and the Arkansas Department of
Education to dismiss plaintiffs’ lawsuit as untimely [Doc. No. 9] is granted and their motion
to dismiss for failure to state a claim is denied as moot. Plaintiffs’ amended complaint is
dismissed with prejudice because their original complaint was untimely filed.
Plaintiffs, Arvinthan Nadar and Prema Thangavel filed an administrative due process
claim against the Bentonville School District on December 4, 2013. The claim was filed with
the Arkansas Department of Education ("ADE") claiming a violation of the Individuals with
Disability Education Act (“IDEA”). The claim was dismissed by an administrative hearing
officer on March 13, 2014. Plaintiffs filed this lawsuit on June 17, 2014, seeking reversal
of the hearing officer's decision.
Plaintiffs’ claims must be dismissed because they were filed more than ninety days
after the hearing officer’s decision was rendered. 20 U.S.C.A. § 1415 (i)(2)(B) (2004); Smith
v. D.C., 496 F. Supp. 2d 125, 128 (D.D.C. 2007). Arkansas does not have an explicit time
limitation for filing lawsuits similar to this one. Therefore, the ninety day limitations period

applies. Id.
Accordingly, defendants’ motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 9] is granted and plaintiffs’
amended complaint [Doc. No. 6] is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 14th day of October 2014.
________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2