l: \i !TED SL\ TES DEPARTMENT OF EDUC.\ TION OFFICE FOR CJVJL RIGHJ'c..; 50 UN)!IJ) \.,\J"J(.)l',;", !'LA/.\ llH ,Ill' I'· • '· th•1-::-,,:, MAIL U0, 1200: !;:()0\1 13-!3 :-.,\!'. FI{.\i"st ·1sc.o. c·,\ 9~ 10.:! June 29, 2017 (In reply, please refer to case no. 09-17-2091.) Oearr )(6),(b)(7)(C) I I 6 On (b)( >.cb>(?>cc > the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), accepted a complaint against Harvey Mudd College (the College) for investigation. You (the Complainant) alleged discrimination on the basis of sex when you were denied an equitable process in resolving sexual assault complaints filed by and against you. For the reasons explained below, OCR is closing its investigation of this complaint as of the date of this letter. OCR opened the complaint under the authority of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex ·in programs and activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. The College receives funds from the Department and is subject to the above laws and their regulations as enforced by OCR On March 10, 2017, the Complainant filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus (the Petition) against the College in state court. After careful review of the Petition, OCR has determined that the Complainant filed the same allegations against the College with the state court as it has filed with OCR. Pursuant to Section 11O(b) of OCR's Case Processing Manual (CPM), 1 OCR will administratively close a complaint where, as here, the same complaint allegations have been filed by the Complainant against the same recipient with state or federal court, and OCR has not obtained evidence sufficient to support a finding under CPM section 303. This concludes OCR's investigation of the complaint and should not be interpreted to address the College's compliance with any other regulatory provision or to address any issues other than those addressed in this letter. OCR is closing this complaint as of the date of this letter and notifying the College by concurrent letter. 1 OCR's Case Processing Manual may be found at http:i/www2.ed. gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrcpm .html I ·· •,., ··, • · : .t,1< :H;. ,n '- m, ..,11,n ,~ hl pnimuli' <;tudent ,i.·hi\·V,'ll1L'Tlt ,rnd prq.,<1r,itio1>ro1 :ilnhc1J,·, •Olf'• · ,111dl'Ji,-,unni; ,•yu.il arLL·<;,. I.>\·h •,11:n11.,; 1•ciu,·,1tional L·x,-.!11,•n,·, 11t11,•r:,·-.• Page 2- (09-17-2091) The Complainant may file a new complaint with OCR within 60 days following termination of the court proceeding if there has been no decision on the merits or settlement of the complaint allegations. Disrnissal with prejudice is considered a decision on the merits. This letter sets forth OCR's determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a formal statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as such. OCR's formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR official and made available to the public. The Complainant may have the right to file a private suit in federal court whether or not OCR finds a violation. Please be advised that the College may not harass, coerce, intimidate, retaliate, or discriminate against any individual because he or she has filed a complaint or participated in the complaint resolution process. If this happens, the Complainant may file another complaint alleging such treatment. Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and related records on request. If OCR receives such a request, it will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personal information which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. If you have any questions about this letter, please call Sewali Patel at 415-486-5380 or Monique Raco Fuentes at 415·486-5587. Sincerely, (b)(6),(b)(7)(C) Ma Beth McLeod Program Manager \ ''\ITED SJ AfES DEPARTMENT OF EDCCATION Ol+ICE FOR CIVlL RIGI-ffc., Rl,ClPLAZA ~1AlL 11ox 1200: 1,um,115.J.'i '>.\'-.. b'RANCI',(() l"..\'J.!l\C June 29, 2017 Dr. Maria Klawe President Harvey Mudd College 301 Platt Boulevard Claremont, California 91711 (In reply, please refer to case no. 09-17-2091.) Dear President Klawe: On December 28, 2016, the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights (OCR), accepted a complaint against Harvey Mudd College (the College) for investigation. The Complainant' alleged discrimination on the basis of sex when the Complainant was denied an equitable process in resolving sexual assault complaints filed by and against the Complainant. For the reasons explained below, OCR is closing its investigation of this complaint as of the date of this letter. OCR opened the complaint under the authority of Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and its implementing regulation at 34 C.F.R. Part 106, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sex in programs and activities operated by recipients of Federal financial assistance. The College receives funds from the Department and is subject to the above laws and their regulations as enforced by OCR. On March 10, 2017, the Complainant filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus (the Petition) against the College in state court. After careful review of the Petition, OCR has determined that the Complainant filed the same allegations against the College with the state court as it has filed with OCR. Pursuant to Section 110(b) of OCR's Case Processing Manual (CPM), 2 OCR will administratively close a complaint where, as here, the same complaint allegations have been filed by the Complainant against the same recipient with state or federal court, and OCR has not obtained evidence sufficient to support a finding under CPM section 303. 1 OCR previously provided the College with the identity of the Complainant. We are withholding the Complainant's name from this letter to protect the Complainant's privacy. 2 OCR's Case Processing Manual may be found at http:11www2.ed.qov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/ocrcprn.html '. .] !, • l nH~~lUTl I~ to pn >IHPlL' 5tuJent JChieVL'lllt'llt ,11,d pr0cp,ir,1t1<,n t{l] gl\>h1I , q,•ri111;,,ducc1 lhin,11t'X<\'llt·nv · Jnd vn~urn1g cquc1l <1t<·~·~~- ,, I , 1\lcd\JC\I] Page 2- (09-17-2091) This concludes OCR's investigation of the complaint and should not be interpreted to address the College's compliance with any other regulatory provision or to address any issues other than those addressed in this letter. OCR is closing this complaint as of the date of this letter and notifying the Complainant by concurrent letter. The Complainant may file a new complaint with OCR within 60 days following termination of the court proceeding if there has been no decision on the merits or settlement of the complaint allegations. Dismissal with prejudice is considered a decision on the merits. This letter sets forth OCR's determination in an individual OCR case. This letter is not a formal statement of OCR policy and should not be relied upon, cited, or construed as such. OCR's formal policy statements are approved by a duly authorized OCR official and made available to the public. The Complainant may have the right to file a private suit in federal court whether or not OCR finds a violation. Please be advised that the College may not harass, coerce, intimidate, retaliate, or discriminate against any individual because he or she has filed a complaint or participated in the complaint resolution process. If this happens, the Complainant may file another complaint alleging such treatment. Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to release this document and related records on request. If OCR receives such a request, it will seek to protect, to the extent provided by law, personal information which, if released, could reasonably be expected to constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. If you have any questions about this letter, please call Sewali Patel at 415-486-5380 or Monique Raco Fuentes at 415-486-5587. Sincerely, Program Manager cc: Stuart W. Rudnick of Musick, Peeler & Garrett LLP (College's counsel) via e-mail