What the panel ordered
The Appeals Board reversed the WCJ's finding that the applicant rebutted the presumptive validity of the 2005 PDRS and remanded for further proceedings including rating under the 2005 PDRS.
The WCJ found the applicant rebutted the presumptive validity of the 2005 PDRS, but the Appeals Board en banc reviewed and reversed this finding, holding the applicant failed to rebut the presumptive validity of the 2005 PDRS.
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
The Appeals Board held that the applicant failed to carry the burden of demonstrating that the adoption of the 2005 PDRS was arbitrary and capricious or inconsistent with Labor Code section 4660(b)(2), thus failing to rebut the presumptive validity of the 2005 PDRS.
From the decision · page 113 permanent disability rating schedule (PDRS), adopted January 1, 2005, under Labor Code section
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The Administrative Director (AD) incorporated empirical data in adopting the 2005 PDRS.