Case: J.P. v. Educational Testing Services

2:20-cv-04502 | U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Filed Date: May 19, 2020

Case Ongoing

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

COVID-19 summary: This is a putative class action complaint brought by four parents and a public charity against the College Entrance Examination Board and Education Testing Services for breach of contract on behalf of all students registered to take at-home Advanced Placement (AP) exams, for the defendant’s failure to administer its AP exams without prejudice. The suit was filed after students experienced a series of technical difficulties with their AP exams, administered at home by the defen…

COVID-19 summary: This is a putative class action complaint brought by four parents and a public charity against the College Entrance Examination Board and Education Testing Services for breach of contract on behalf of all students registered to take at-home Advanced Placement (AP) exams, for the defendant’s failure to administer its AP exams without prejudice. The suit was filed after students experienced a series of technical difficulties with their AP exams, administered at home by the defendant due to COVID-19. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant breached contract by failing to ensure a fair and equitable testing opportunity and that the defendant knowingly discriminated against under-resourced and disabled students, and students in remote locations. The plaintiffs sought injunctive relief, compensatory damages exceeding $500 million, and punitive damages. In October 2020, the court compelled arbitration on several of the plaintiffs' claims and stayed the entire case pending the arbitration. The court denied a motion by the plaintiffs to reconsider the stay in April of 2021. The case remains stayed.


In March 2020, the College Board decided that AP exams for the 2019-2020 school year would be administered at home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Prior to the exams, counselors and educators communicated concerns that the at-home exams were not fair to students who had no access to a computer, internet, or quiet workspaces, under-resourced students, and students requiring accommodations. The plaintiffs claimed that prior to the exams, the defendants acknowledged that the “digital divide” could prevent low-income and rural students from participating, however, they did not change their policies to address the issues. After three days of at-home exams, the defendant announced that there were failures in uploading the exams due to technical difficulties. According to reports, anywhere between 5% to 20% of examinees were unable to submit their responses during the first three days of exams. The plaintiffs noted that many students relied on AP exam scores for the financial benefits of college placement and credit.

On May 19, 2020, four parents and the National Center for Fair & Open Testing ("FairTest") brought suit against the College Entrance Examination Board and Education Testing Services on behalf of their minor children and all other similarly situated students registered to take at-home Advancement Placement ("AP") exams. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendants breached their contract with the plaintiffs and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing between the parties by failing to ensure a fair and equitable testing opportunity and by failing to prevent anyone from gaining an unfair advantage. The plaintiffs also alleged that the defendants knowingly discriminated against under-resourced students, disabled students, and students in remote locations in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Unruh Act, and the Rehabilitation Act. They further alleged unfair competition, false advertisement, and negligence. Filed in the District Court of the Central District of California, the plaintiffs sought injunctive relief requiring the College Board to accept any test answers by timestamp, photo, and email, as well as compensatory damages exceeding $500 million. The plaintiffs also sought punitive damages and interests and costs. The plaintiffs also sought class certification and a jury trial. The plaintiffs were represented by the Miller Advocacy Group and private attorneys. The case was assigned to District Judge Philip S. Guitierrez and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo.

The plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on June 22, 2020, and the defendants moved to stay the case pending arbitration on August 31. The defendants claimed that the individual plaintiffs had agreed to abide by certain terms and conditions when they registered for the exam, which included a mandatory arbitration clause. They also argued that FairTest should be forced to arbitrate because FairTest's claims are dependent on a contract between the defendant and the individual plaintiffs that included a mandatory arbitration clause. The defendants requested that the court enforce the arbitration agreement and stay the case under the Federal Arbitration Act. The plaintiffs opposed the motion. They first argued that the defendants failed to make the terms of the AP exams accessible to the disabled plaintiffs, which made it impossible for the disabled plaintiffs to agree to the terms. Next, they argued that the charter plaintiffs had not agreed to arbitration because they were unable to take the AP exams for lack of a testing site and therefore did not agree to the terms. The plaintiffs also argued that FairTest is not bound by any arbitration agreement, since it did not sign any contracts with the defendants.

On October 30, 2020, the court granted the defendants' motion to stay all proceedings pending arbitration for all plaintiffs that accepted the AP Exam Agreement. The court found that there were two different agreements at issue in this case: (1) the "My AP Agreement," which individual plaintiffs accepted in order to access the College Board's website; and (2) the "AP Exam Agreement," which all AP test takers were required to accept in order to take online AP exams. The court found that the My AP Agreement was unconscionable because the arbitration provision only applied to test-takers' claims against the College Board and did not apply to any claims brought by the College Board against test-takers. The court found that this showed that the agreement clearly favored the defendants in this case over the plaintiffs and was thus unenforceable.

The court then turned to the AP Exam Agreement. The court found that the parties formed a contract when the test-taker plaintiffs accepted the agreement and that the agreement contained a valid delegation clause. Since the court found that the test-takers had agreed to arbitrate the arbitrability of the AP Exam agreement, the court declined to consider the test-taker plaintiffs' challenges to the validity or enforceability of the AP Exam Agreement as a whole. The court also found that, since FairTest did not bring any clauses of action independent of the individual test-takers, FairTest was required to arbitrate any of its claims that depend on the claims of the plaintiffs who accepted the AP Exam Agreement. However, the court denied the motion to compel arbitration for the plaintiffs who had not accepted the AP Exam Agreement, in addition to FairTest's claims based on the claims of these plaintiffs. The court also stayed all further litigation, pending the arbitration of the arbitrable claims, finding that the plaintiffs without arbitrable claims would only suffer a delay in proceedings, while all parties and the court could avoid costly and potentially unnecessary proceedings.

On February 24, 2021, the plaintiffs moved to re-open the litigation. On April 15, the court denied the motion. 2021 WL 3519916. The court construed the plaintiffs' motion as a motion for reconsideration of its prior order on October 30, 2020. Based on the Central District of California's Local Rule 7-18, a motion for reconsideration may be made only on the grounds of (a) a material difference in fact or law from that previously presented to the court and that could not have been known by the plaintiff in the exercise of reasonable diligence; (b) the emergence of new material facts or a change of law occurring after the prior decision; or (c) a manifest showing of a failure to consider material facts presented to the court. The court found that the plaintiffs' motion did not meet the Local Rule 7-18 standard. The court found that the plaintiffs' motion re-raised two arguments, which is not a proper ground for a motion for reconsideration. The court also found that two of the plaintiffs' other arguments should have been raised earlier in the litigation and therefore should not be considered by the court. The court also found that the plaintiffs failed to raise any new evidence that would justify granting a motion for reconsideration. Therefore, the court allowed its prior order to stay the proceedings to stand and declined to re-open the litigation.

The case remains stayed.

Summary Authors

Averyn Lee (9/21/2020)

Nicholas Gillan (11/22/2021)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17177781/parties/jp-on-behalf-of-her-minor-son-rp-v-educational-testing-services/


Judge(s)

Castillo, Pedro V. (California)

Gutierrez, Philip S. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baker, Phillip A. (California)

Hoffman, Christina N (California)

Lowe, Derrick S. (California)

Miller, Marci Lerner (California)

Stone, Jennifer (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Benedetto, Matthew D. (California)

Judge(s)

Castillo, Pedro V. (California)

Gutierrez, Philip S. (California)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Baker, Phillip A. (California)

Hoffman, Christina N (California)

Lowe, Derrick S. (California)

Miller, Marci Lerner (California)

Stone, Jennifer (California)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Benedetto, Matthew D. (California)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

Docket [PACER]

Nov. 2, 2021 Docket
1

Nationwide and California Class Action Complaint

May 19, 2020 Complaint
15

Nationwide and California Class Action First Amended Complaint & Demand for Jury Trial

June 22, 2020 Complaint
21

Motion to Stay Case

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

Aug. 31, 2020 Pleading / Motion / Brief
25

Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

Sept. 30, 2020 Pleading / Motion / Brief
32

The Court Grants in part and Denies in part Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration and Grants Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

2020 WL 10693044

Oct. 30, 2020 Order/Opinion
34

Reopen Case AND Alter Judgment

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

Feb. 23, 2021 Pleading / Motion / Brief
35

Motion to Correct Docket Items Nos. 34-1 and 34-9 to Remove and Replace Incorrectly Filed Documents

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

Feb. 24, 2021 Pleading / Motion / Brief
43

Reopen Case AND Alter Judgment

J. P. v. Educational Testing Services

2021 WL 3519916

April 15, 2021 Order/Opinion

Resources

Title Description External URL

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/17177781/jp-on-behalf-of-her-minor-son-rp-v-educational-testing-services/

Last updated May 20, 2022, 5:24 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link
1

COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-26495301 - Fee: $400, filed by Plaintiffs A.K., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, The National Center for Fair & Open Testing, doing business as FairTest, a Massachusetts corporation, M.S. on behalf of her minor daugther Z.S., and all others similarly situated, J.P. on behalf of her minor son R.P., and all others similarly situated, R.G. on behalf of her minor son J.G., and all others similarly situated. (Attorney Phillip A Baker added to party A.K., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated(pty:pla), Attorney Phillip A Baker added to party J.P. on behalf of her minor son R.P., and all others similarly situated(pty:pla), Attorney Phillip A Baker added to party M.S. on behalf of her minor daugther Z.S., and all others similarly situated(pty:pla), Attorney Phillip A Baker added to party R.G. on behalf of her minor son J.G., and all others similarly situated(pty:pla), Attorney Phillip A Baker added to party The National Center for Fair & Open Testing, doing business as FairTest, a Massachusetts corporation(pty:pla))(Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 05/19/2020)

May 19, 2020 PACER
2

CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs A.K., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, J.P. on behalf of her minor son R.P., and all others similarly situated, M.S. on behalf of her minor daugther Z.S., and all others similarly situated, R.G. on behalf of her minor son J.G., and all others similarly situated, The National Center for Fair & Open Testing, doing business as FairTest, a Massachusetts corporation. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 05/19/2020)

May 19, 2020 RECAP
3

CERTIFICATION and NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiffs All Plaintiffs, (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 05/19/2020)

May 19, 2020 PACER
4

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Philip S. Gutierrez and Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo. (jtil) (Entered: 05/20/2020)

May 20, 2020 PACER
5

NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (jtil) (Entered: 05/20/2020)

May 20, 2020 PACER
6

STANDING ORDER REGARDING NEWLY ASSIGNED CASES by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (ji) (Entered: 05/20/2020)

May 20, 2020 PACER
7

Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,,, 1 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 05/27/2020)

May 27, 2020 PACER
8

Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,,, 1 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 05/27/2020)

May 27, 2020 PACER
9

21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint 1 as to Defendant The College Entrance Examination Board. (bm) (Entered: 05/28/2020)

May 28, 2020 PACER
10

21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint 1 as to Defendant Educational Testing Services (ETS). (bm) (Entered: 05/28/2020)

May 28, 2020 PACER
11

WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by defendant Educational Testing Services (ETS). upon Educational Testing Services (ETS) waiver sent by Plaintiff on 6/1/2020, answer due 7/31/2020. Waiver of Service signed by Alan E. Schoenfeld. (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 06/02/2020)

June 2, 2020 PACER
12

WAIVER OF SERVICE Returned Executed filed by defendant The College Entrance Examination Board. upon The College Entrance Examination Board waiver sent by Plaintiff on 6/1/2020, answer due 7/31/2020. Waiver of Service signed by Alan E. Schoenfeld. (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 06/02/2020)

June 2, 2020 PACER
13

NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Matthew D Benedetto on behalf of Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board (Attorney Matthew D Benedetto added to party Educational Testing Services (ETS)(pty:dft), Attorney Matthew D Benedetto added to party The College Entrance Examination Board(pty:dft))(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 06/02/2020)

June 2, 2020 PACER
14

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT filed by Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 06/02/2020)

June 2, 2020 PACER
15

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT against Defendants All Defendants amending Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening),,,, 1, filed by Plaintiffs A.K., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing, M.S., J.P., R.G.(Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 06/22/2020)

June 22, 2020 PACER
16

NOTICE OF MOTION AND Joint MOTION for Protective Order for The Minor Plaintiffs' Identities, filed by Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 07/02/2020)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 2, 2020 PACER
17

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Answer re Amended Complaint/Petition 15 filed by defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 07/07/2020)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

July 7, 2020 PACER
18

ORDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez, re Stipulation to Extend Time to Answer (More than 30 days) 17 . Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, it is SO ORDERED that: by August 31, 2020, Defendants shall file their motion under the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. Sections 1-16. Plaintiffs shall respond by September 30, 2020. Defendants shall reply by October 15, 2020. Defendants shall answer or otherwise respond to the complaint within 30 days after resolution of the arbitration motion under 9 U.S.C. Sections 1-16. (smo) (Entered: 07/08/2020)

July 8, 2020 PACER
19

PROTECTIVE ORDER by Magistrate Judge Pedro V. Castillo: granting 16 Motion for Protective Order. (see document for details) (hr) (Entered: 07/09/2020)

July 9, 2020 PACER
20

APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Bruce M. Berman to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $400 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-27860690) filed by defendant Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing, # 2 Proposed Order) (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 08/31/2020)

1 Certificate of Good Standing

View on PACER

2 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Aug. 31, 2020 PACER
21

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 filed by defendant Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. Motion set for hearing on 11/2/2020 at 01:30 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of James A. Clewley Jr., # 2 Exhibit 1 - My AP Terms, # 3 Exhibit 2 - AP Exam Terms, # 4 Proposed Order) (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 08/31/2020)

1 Declaration of James A. Clewley Jr.

View on PACER

2 Exhibit 1 - My AP Terms

View on PACER

3 Exhibit 2 - AP Exam Terms

View on PACER

4 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Aug. 31, 2020 RECAP
22

ORDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: granting 20 Non-Resident Attorney Bruce M Berman APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Educational Testing Service and The College Board, designating Matthew D Benedetto as local counsel. (bm) (Entered: 09/02/2020)

Sept. 2, 2020 PACER
23

APPLICATION of Non-Resident Attorney Alan E. Schoenfeld to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board (Pro Hac Vice Fee - $500 Fee Paid, Receipt No. ACACDC-28091764) filed by defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Good Standing - NJ, # 2 Certificate of Good Standing - NY, # 3 Proposed Order) (Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 09/15/2020)

1 Certificate of Good Standing - NJ

View on PACER

2 Certificate of Good Standing - NY

View on PACER

3 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Sept. 15, 2020 PACER
24

ORDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: granting 23 Non-Resident Attorney Alan E Schoenfeld APPLICATION to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Defendants Educational Testing Service and The College Board, designating Matthew D Benedetto as local counsel. (bm) (Entered: 09/17/2020)

Sept. 17, 2020 PACER
25

MEMORANDUM in Opposition to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 21 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Plaintiffs' Objections to Declaration of James A. Clewley, Jr. in support of Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration, # 2 Declaration A.K., # 3 Declaration A.S. (w Exhs A-C), # 4 Declaration C.M., # 5 Declaration D.K., # 6 Declaration Expert, Jay Rosner (w Exhs A-E), # 7 Declaration J.G., # 8 Declaration L.B. (w Exh A), # 9 Declaration M.W., # 10 Declaration N.C., # 11 Declaration Robert Schaeffer, # 12 Declaration R.P., # 13 Declaration Z.S.)(Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 09/30/2020)

1 Supplement Plaintiffs' Objections to Declaration of James A. Clewley, Jr. i

View on PACER

2 Declaration A.K.

View on PACER

3 Declaration A.S. (w Exhs A-C)

View on PACER

4 Declaration C.M.

View on PACER

5 Declaration D.K.

View on PACER

6 Declaration Expert, Jay Rosner (w Exhs A-E)

View on PACER

7 Declaration J.G.

View on PACER

8 Declaration L.B. (w Exh A)

View on PACER

9 Declaration M.W.

View on PACER

10 Declaration N.C.

View on PACER

11 Declaration Robert Schaeffer

View on PACER

12 Declaration R.P.

View on PACER

13 Declaration Z.S.

View on PACER

Sept. 30, 2020 RECAP
26

DECLARATION of Derrick S. Lowe in support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 21 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 09/30/2020)

Sept. 30, 2020 PACER
27

DECLARATION of Marci Lerner Miller in support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendants' NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 21 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 09/30/2020)

Sept. 30, 2020 PACER
28

STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File a Reply Brief filed by Defendant Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 10/05/2020)

1 Proposed Order

View on PACER

Oct. 5, 2020 PACER
29

ORDER by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. Pursuant to the parties' stipulation 28, it is SO ORDERED that Defendants shall file their reply by October 22, 2020. (yl) (Entered: 10/08/2020)

Oct. 7, 2020 PACER
30

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 21 filed by Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Supplemental Declaration of James A. Clewley Jr.)(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 10/22/2020)

1 Supplemental Declaration of James A. Clewley Jr.

View on PACER

Oct. 22, 2020 PACER
31

OBJECTION in Opposition to Supplemental Declaration of James A Clewley, Jr. re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Stay Case pending Arbitration Pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 3 21 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 10/27/2020)

Oct. 27, 2020 PACER
32

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) The Court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Defendants motion to compel arbitration and GRANTS Defendants motion to dismiss 21 by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: The Court GRANTS Defendants' motion to stay all Plaintiffs' claims pending arbitration of the arbitrable claims. The case is administratively closed and may be reopened by application of any party. IT IS SO ORDERED. (See minutes for further details) (yl) (Entered: 10/30/2020)

Oct. 30, 2020 RECAP
33

Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Derrick S Lowe counsel for Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Adding Derrick S. Lowe as counsel of record for Plaintiffs for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Plaintiffs J.P. on behalf of her minor son R.P.. (Attorney Derrick S Lowe added to party A.K.(pty:pla), Attorney Derrick S Lowe added to party J.P.(pty:pla), Attorney Derrick S Lowe added to party M.S.(pty:pla), Attorney Derrick S Lowe added to party R.G.(pty:pla), Attorney Derrick S Lowe added to party The National Center for Fair and Open Testing(pty:pla))(Lowe, Derrick) (Entered: 02/22/2021)

Feb. 22, 2021 PACER
34

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 ., NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Motion set for hearing on 4/5/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum Points & Authorities, # 2 Declaration Derrick S. Lowe, # 3 Exhibit A to D. Lowe Declaration, # 4 Exhibit B to D. Lowe Declaration, # 5 Declaration Philllip A. Baker, # 6 Exhibit C to P. Baker Declaration, # 7 Exhibit D to P. Baker Declaration, # 8 Exhibit E to P. Baker Declaration, # 9 Exhibit F to P. Baker Declaration, # 10 Exhibit G to P. Baker Declaration, # 11 Declaration A.K., # 12 Declaration and Exh - C.M., # 13 Declaration and Exh - D.K., # 14 Declaration and Exh - J.G., # 15 Declaration and Exh - K.L, # 16 Declaration L.B., # 17 Declaration M.W., # 18 Declaration and Exh - N.C., # 19 Declaration and Exh - R.P., # 20 Declaration Robert Schaeffer, # 21 Declaration Z.S., # 22 Proposed Order re Plaintiffs Motion to Re-Open Litigation Pursuant to Court Order) (Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 02/23/2021)

Feb. 23, 2021 RECAP
35

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Correct NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Motion set for hearing on 4/5/2021 at 01:30 PM before Judge Philip S. Gutierrez. (Attachments: # 1 Memorandum of Points & Authorities, # 2 Declaration of Phillip A. Baker, # 3 Exhibit C - P. Baker, # 4 Exhibit D - P. Baker, # 5 Exhibit E - P. Baker, # 6 Exhibit F - P. Baker, # 7 Exhibit G - P. Baker, # 8 Proposed Order to Motion to Correct) (Lowe, Derrick) (Entered: 02/24/2021)

1

View on RECAP

Feb. 24, 2021 RECAP
36

ORDER RE: MOTION TO CORRECT DOCKET ITEMS NOS. 34-1 AND 34-9 TO REMOVE AND REPLACE INCORRECTLY FILED DOCUMENTS INADVERTENTLY CONTAINING CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ADJUGED, ORDERED AND DECREED that the Motion is GRANTED. Accordingly, the temporary seal of items at Dkt. 34-1 and Dkt. 34-9 shall remain in place until such time as those items are fully withdrawn and removed from the ECF system and the concurrently filed, replacement items for Dkt. 34-1 and 34-9 shall be accepted for filing and shall replace the removed items with respect to Plaintiffs Motion to Re-Open Litigation Pursuant to Court Order. IT IS SO ORDERED. (See document for further details) 35 (yl) (Entered: 02/24/2021)

Feb. 24, 2021 PACER
37

NOTICE of Change of Attorney Business or Contact Information: for attorney Marci Lerner Miller counsel for Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Changing Firm Name to Potomac Law Group, PLLC. Changing email to mmiller@potomaclaw.com. Filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Miller, Marci) (Entered: 02/25/2021)

Feb. 25, 2021 PACER
38

NOTICE of Change of Attorney Business or Contact Information: for attorney Christina N Hoffman counsel for Plaintiffs J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. Changing firm name to Christina N. Hoffman Law LLC, 307 North Garfield Ave. P.O. Box 1039, Alhambra, CA 91802. Changing email to cnhoffman@cnhoffmanlaw.com. Filed by Plaintiffs J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Hoffman, Christina) (Entered: 03/15/2021)

March 15, 2021 PACER
39

OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34 filed by Defendants Educational Testing Services (ETS), The College Entrance Examination Board. (Attachments: # 1 Declaration of James A. Clewley, Jr. in Support of Opposition Brief to Plaintiffs Motion to Re-Open Litigation)(Benedetto, Matthew) (Entered: 03/15/2021)

March 15, 2021 PACER
40

Joint STIPULATION for Extension of Time to File Reply as to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Correct NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34 35 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Order)(Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 03/18/2021)

March 18, 2021 PACER
41

ORDER re: PARTIES' STIPULATION EXTENDING PLAINTIFFS' TIME TO FILE REPLY BRIEF AND CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON MOTION TO REOPEN LITIGATION by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez 40 Pursuant to parties' Stipulation, it is SO ORDERED that: by March 29, 2021, Plaintiffs shall file a reply brief to the Motion to Re-Open Litigation. The hearing for said Motion to Re- Open Litigation will be continued from April 5, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. to April 19, 2021 at 1:30 p.m. unless ordered otherwise. IT IS SO ORDERED. (yl) (Entered: 03/22/2021)

March 19, 2021 PACER
42

REPLY in support of NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34, NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Correct NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Alter Judgment re Order on Motion to Stay Case, 32 . NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Reopen Case 34 35 filed by Plaintiffs A.K., J.P., M.S., R.G., The National Center for Fair and Open Testing. (Attachments: # 1 Supplement Objections to Third Declaration of James A. Clewley, Jr.)(Baker, Phillip) (Entered: 03/24/2021)

March 24, 2021 PACER
43

MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) The Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration 34 by Judge Philip S. Gutierrez: For the foregoing reasons, the Court DENIES Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration under Local Rule 7-18. IT IS SO ORDERED. (See document for further details) (yl) (Entered: 04/15/2021)

April 15, 2021 RECAP

State / Territory: California

Case Type(s):

Education

Special Collection(s):

COVID-19 (novel coronavirus)

Key Dates

Filing Date: May 19, 2020

Case Ongoing: Yes

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Four parents and a public charity on behalf of all students registered to take at-home AP exams.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Non-profit NON-religious organization

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Pending

Defendants

the College Entrance Examination Board , Private Entity/Person

Education Testing Services, Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Section 504 (Rehabilitation Act), 29 U.S.C. § 701

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None yet

Source of Relief:

None yet

Issues

General:

Access to public accommodations - privately owned

Screen readers and similar accessibility devices

Testing

Discrimination-area:

Accommodation / Leave

Testing

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

Disability:

disability, unspecified

Type of Facility:

Non-government for profit