1. Whether Petitioners' claims that the CDE Defendants violated federal law by (i) effectively waiving LEAs' compliance with the IDEA after forced school closures and (ii) failing to correct for students' resulting FAPE deprivations presents a concrete controversy that could be addressed by a judicial declaration of the CDE's obligations under the IDEA.

2. Whether an injunction directing the CDE Defendants to order LEAs to reevaluate Petitioners' IEPs and settlement agreements to account for the months when accommodations were not provided, and to order compensatory education to account for the regression and loss of learning Petitioners suffered, could provide effective relief sufficient to survive the mootness inquiry.

3. Whether a cause of action can be dismissed as moot where some relief remains available, regardless of whether Petitioners requested that specific relief in their complaint.

Whether Petitioners' claims that the CDE Defendants violated federal law