In the first round of what could be a lengthy federal case, the Derry Township-based Milton Hershey School filed a response Friday to a lawsuit alleging it violated a student's civil rights by denying him admission last year.

The student's denial was predicated on his HIV-positive status, which was disclosed to the school during the admission's process.

The teen, who has remained anonymous, filed a federal suit against the school in November seeking admission to the school and unspecified damages.

In its response, the school does not ask the court to dismiss the case, but rather to make a judgment as to whether it violated the Americans with Disabilities Act in denying admission.

“From the beginning, we have said that this was a difficult case, which belonged before the court,” school officials said in a statement. “In our request for a declaratory judgment, we are asking the court to make a determination on a narrow issue of the law: Does this student’s chronic contagious illness pose a direct threat to the health and safety of our students?”

The filing sets the legal framework for the school’s arguments and provides details regarding how it made the decision to deny the 13-year-old admission.

Milton Hershey's main argument continues to be that the student's HIV status poses a threat to the safety of other students.

Not because of the possibility of accidental blood transfer — which the school acknowledges is remote — but because of fears the student could become sexually active while at the school.

The case, Milton Hershey argues, “requires a realistic examination of teen sexuality,” especially within the residential school setting, where the school admits a significant percentage of the students engage in sexual activity, despite rules and educational efforts to the contrary.

While the courts have ruled on similar arguments in other settings, they have never applied them “in the context of consensual sexual activity among minors ... in this type of homelike setting,” the school states.

Attorneys for the school also argue that Milton Hershey would have been unable to meet ADA requirements without disclosing the student’s HIV-positive status to his caregivers.

They go on to say the school “also concluded that fellow students in the home had a need and possible right to know of his condition.”

In doing so the school would have violated the family’s requests that the teen’s condition remain confidential.

One of the final arguments the school puts forth is based around the system of “universal precautions,” which includes the wearing of gloves when coming into contact with body fluids.

To accommodate the teen would have required changes to procedures within the student homes, such as training students not to provide first aid for one another without following universal precautions.

That, it argues, might require a “fundamental alteration” of programs, thus proving to be an undue burden.

Ronda Goldfein, executive director of the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania, which represents the teen, said the response contained no big surprises.

Goldfein said the school’s argument partially boils down to a declaration that HIV-positive people — especially teens — are inherently dangerous in a group-living situation.

“Under that theory, teens should be what, quarantined?” she asked rhetorically.

She also dismissed the school’s arguments regarding modifying policies or procedures, stating policies regarding universal precautions “should have been implemented 30 years ago.”

Her firm plans to file its own answer by the end of the month.

Neither party involved in the suit has shown any signs of seeking a settlement and instead appear prepared to follow through in seeking a court decision.

"This is just the opening salvo," said Tom Myers, general counsel for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which is providing the AIDS Law Project with financial assistance.

After reviewing the filing, Myers said it appeared the school was arguing that complying with the law was “too hard, and we don’t want to do it.”

“On a certain level, that’s understandable,” he said. “But the law is the law. It may be hard to follow, but it’s the law.”

For the first time, the school also provided some information regarding the process through which it decided to deny the teen admission.

In court documents, Milton Hershey said the student’s medical records were reviewed by its lead physician and a group of senior administrators, pursuant to the school’s ADA policy before choosing to reject his application.

Milton Hershey said it also reconsidered the teen’s rejection at the request of his attorney but again concluded that his condition posed a threat to other students.

“The school is sympathetic to [the teen’s] medical condition, but must balance his rights against its obligations to the health and safety of other students,” attorneys for the school wrote.

Meanwhile, in a separately filed motion, the school’s attorneys are asking to move the case from Philadelphia to Harrisburg.

While the student and his family live in the Philadelphia region, that is the case’s only tie to the eastern federal district.

The school, its staff and all of the events precipitating the suit’s filing occurred in the Hershey area, therefore the lawsuit should be heard there as well, the school argues.

The request also can be perceived as a chance for the school to secure home-field advantage by moving the case away from the courts in Philadelphia to courts in central Pennsylvania where judges are familiar with the school.

The AIDS Law Project has until Monday to respond to the school’s change of venue request.