The Upper St. Clair School District this week filed a motion to dismiss some of the counts in a federal lawsuit filed against it in June, claiming that the one person who was aware of alleged sexual assaults in the high school was not an employee of the district but an independent contractor.

The response, filed Tuesday, covers all of the defendants named in the lawsuit, except Esther R. Von Waldow, formerly Esther Haguel.

Her attorneys yesterday did not want to comment on the district's motion, saying instead that they will be filing their own regarding the legal deficiencies of the lawsuit on Monday.

A student at the school, identified in the lawsuit as Jane Doe to protect her, filed the lawsuit against the district and a number of officials there on June 30. In it, she and her parents claim that school officials were aware of a boy, identified as Michael Roe, having committed previous sexual assaults on the girl but failed to take appropriate action.

In the lawsuit, Jane Doe claims that Ms. Von Waldow, an intervention specialist at the high school, was aware of ongoing problems with the boy -- including alleged sexual assaults and inappropriate text messaging -- but took no substantive action to help her.

In its motion, the school district said that there are no allegations of wrongdoing involving any individual named as a defendant except Ms. Von Waldow, who was employed by Wesley Institute, which had a contract to provide services to the district.

The only other allegation that directly involved another defendant, wrote attorney Anthony G. Sanchez, was that Principal Michael Ghilani refused a request by Ms. Von Waldow to escort Jane Doe to the bus because she was concerned about the girl.

"This allegation in and of itself does not arise to the level of personal involvement in the harassing conduct of Michael Roe," the attorney wrote.

In its motion to dismiss, the school district argues that a defendant in a civil rights claim must have "personal involvement in the alleged wrongs."

"In order to establish liability, therefore, the plaintiffs must plead that a policy, practice or custom played an affirmative role in bringing about the alleged sexual assault and that the defendant acted with deliberate indifference."

The attorney for Upper St. Clair claims that the plaintiffs' statements say that was not the case.

"To the contrary, the plaintiff's allegations reveal that the school district investigated and instituted discipline on an unrelated matter to minor plaintiff's alleged harm promptly," Mr. Sanchez wrote. "That plaintiffs do not agree with the decision of the school district is of no consequence."

The boy, who was 14 at the time, has been charged with rape, simple and aggravated assault, and terroristic threats.

The charges against him are still pending.