JB et al v. WELLS-OGUNQUIT COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Filing 38

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 32 Report and Recommendations. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MAINE
J.B. AND A.B., individually and as
)
parents and next friends of G.B., a )
minor,
)
)
PLAINTIFFS
)
)
V.
)
)
)
WELLS-OGUNQUIT COMMUNITY
)
SCHOOL DISTRICT,
)
)
DEFENDANT

CIVIL NO. 2:13-CV-11-DBH

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION
OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On May 31, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court,
with copies to counsel, his Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
Law. The plaintiffs filed an objection to the Recommended Decision on June 30,
2014.

Oral argument was held on August 12, 2014.

I have reviewed and

considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have
made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended
Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United States
Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision, as
clarified below, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary.
Although the plaintiffs take umbrage at the Magistrate Judge’s
characterization of some of their arguments, I am satisfied that he understood
their arguments, and I agree with his resolution of them. And I do not agree that

he or the hearing officer misunderstood the appropriate standards or misapplied
them. I accept the plaintiffs’ statement that “a student’s adequate achievement
with the support of special education and related services is not . . . the yardstick
by which to determine whether to terminate her IDEA eligibility going forward.”
Pls.’ Objection at 4 (ECF No. 33). But at the same time the IEP team, the hearing
officer, and the Magistrate Judge can certainly consider that piece of information
among other factors.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate
Judge is hereby ADOPTED. The Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions
of Law are ADOPTED and the plaintiffs’ appeal is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
DATED THIS 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2014
/S/ D. BROCK HORNBY__________________
D. BROCK HORNBY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2