IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
April 25, 2008
No. 07-30999
Summary Calendar Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
THEODORE JOHNSON
Plaintiff - Appellant
v.
LOUISIANA STATE; PRESIDENT OF LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
SYSTEM; LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION; BOARD OF
REGENTS; BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR LOUISIANA STATE
UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE
Defendants - Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana
USDC No. 02:01-CV-2002
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
This case involves allegations that Theodore Johnson was denied financial
aid on the basis of his disability in violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794(b)(3), and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 07-30999
Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12132. This matter reaches us on appeal following the
district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the State of Louisiana, the
Louisiana Department of Education, the President of the Louisiana State
University System, and the University of New Orleans (collectively,
“Defendants”). After reviewing the record, we AFFIRM for the reasons assigned
by the district court:
1. Johnson has not shown that he was denied financial aid solely on
the basis of his disability; that despite his disability, he was
otherwise qualified to receive the denied financial aid; or that his
disability was even a motivating factor. He also has not shown that
he had imposed upon him, on the basis of his disability, academic
standards that are any different than those imposed on all students
in order to qualify for financial aid. Finally, his request that
Defendants reinstate his financial aid despite his substandard
academic performance is not a reasonable accommodation,
especially given his concession that his failure to make the required
grades during the relevant period was not the result of his
disability, but of his inability to catch up when he started classes a
week late. Thus, his Rehabilitation Act and ADA claims lack merit.
See Pinkerton v. United States Dep’t of Educ., 508 F.3d 207, 210,
212-14 (5th Cir. 2007).
2. Johnson was not denied his right to appeal the financial aid
decisions. Instead, his first appeal was approved, and when he
failed to meet the academic standards required to continue his
financial aid, he was given a written notice of his right to appeal
that determination within a specified time period. He failed to do
so. Thus, his procedural due process claims lack merit. See Able v.
Bacarisse, 131 F.3d 1141, 1143 n.1 (5th Cir. 1998).
2
No. 07-30999
AFFIRMED.
3