Coleman v. District of Columbia

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

A.H., by and through his parent, MERCEDES COLEMAN,

Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 24-3598 (BAH)

v. Judge Beryl A. Howell DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Defendants.

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Pending before the Court, without any objections filed by the parties, is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 26, addressing the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment as to claims by plaintiff, a minor child student, A.H., through his mother, Mercedes Coleman, challenging, under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (“IDEA”), 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., certain findings and remedies ordered by a D.C. Superintendent Hearing Officer’s decision. Am. Compl. ¶¶ 2-4, ECF No. 13-3. The Magistrate Judge recommended affirming several challenged parts of the hearing officer’s findings, but found that “the hearing officer failed adequately to explain the conclusion that A.H. was not entitled to extended school year services and the calculation of compensatory education,” and therefore “recommends remanding this matter [to the hearing officer] for additional proceedings” as to those issues. Report and Recommendation at 1. As noted, no objection to the Report and Recommendation has been filed, and the time to file such an objection has lapsed. See D.D.C. Local Civil Rule 72.3(b). Any objections are thus deemed waived. See, e.g., Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-55 (1985).

After reviewing the Report and Recommendation and the underlying record, the Court concurs with the recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. To the extent the hearing officer failed adequately to explain parts of the decision, remand to the hearing officer for further proceedings in compliance with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is appropriate.

Accordingly, it is hereby—

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 26, is ADOPTED in full; it is further ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 14, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as described in the Report and Recommendation; it is further ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation, defendant’s Cross-

Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 20, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as described in the Report and Recommendation; and it is further ORDERED that this matter is REMANDED for the hearing officer adequately to explain the conclusion that A.H. was not entitled to extended school year services and the calculation of compensatory education, in accordance with the guidance in the Report and Recommendation; it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

This is a final, appealable order.

Date: July 12, 2026

_____________________________

BERYL A. HOWELL

United States District Judge