What the panel ordered
The WCJ's September 2, 2025 Findings and Award is rescinded and the matter is returned to the WCJ for consideration of the parties' settlement stipulation and further proceedings as appropriate.p. 2
Petition for reconsideration of the WCJ's Findings and Award filed September 2, 2025, granted for further review and settlement consideration.
This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold February 2, 2026.
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 WCJ originally found the applicant was not entitled to temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty but did not work; the applicant contended the defendant failed to offer modified work within restrictions; the Appeals Board rescinded the WCJ decision and returned the matter for settlement consideration without ruling on the merits.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the “Findings and Award” (F&A) issued on September 2, 2025, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that applicant was not entitled to an award of temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty, but did not work. Applicant contends that defendant failed to offer modified work within applicant’s work restrictions. We have received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration or grant reconsideration to amend the findings of fact to find that defendant offered appropriate work to applicant. Thereafter, we issued an order granting the petition, pending further review of the entire record. Subsequently, the parties successfully participated in a voluntary mediation at the Appeals Board. On July 16, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by stipulation and order had been reached, and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant was found capable of working modified duty but did not work.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This was the basis for the WCJ's denial of temporary disability benefits.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the “Findings and Award” (F&A) issued on September 2, 2025, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that applicant was not entitled to an award of temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty, but did not work. Applicant contends that defendant failed to offer modified work within applicant’s work restrictions. We have received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration or grant reconsideration to amend the findings of fact to find that defendant offered appropriate work to applicant. Thereafter, we issued an order granting the petition, pending further review of the entire record. Subsequently, the parties successfully participated in a voluntary mediation at the Appeals Board. On July 16, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by stipulation and order had been reached, and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
Applicant contended defendant failed to offer modified work within restrictions.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This contention led to the petition for reconsideration and further review.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the “Findings and Award” (F&A) issued on September 2, 2025, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that applicant was not entitled to an award of temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty, but did not work. Applicant contends that defendant failed to offer modified work within applicant’s work restrictions. We have received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration or grant reconsideration to amend the findings of fact to find that defendant offered appropriate work to applicant. Thereafter, we issued an order granting the petition, pending further review of the entire record. Subsequently, the parties successfully participated in a voluntary mediation at the Appeals Board. On July 16, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by stipulation and order had been reached, and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code
Labor Code section 4656
Relevant to temporary disability and modified work offer dispute
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the “Findings and Award” (F&A) issued on September 2, 2025, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that applicant was not entitled to an award of temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty, but did not work. Applicant contends that defendant failed to offer modified work within applicant’s work restrictions. We have received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration or grant reconsideration to amend the findings of fact to find that defendant offered appropriate work to applicant. Thereafter, we issued an order granting the petition, pending further review of the entire record. Subsequently, the parties successfully participated in a voluntary mediation at the Appeals Board. On July 16, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by stipulation and order had been reached, and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
Labor Code
Labor Code section 4660
Relevant to temporary disability and modified work offer dispute
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the “Findings and Award” (F&A) issued on September 2, 2025, by the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that applicant was not entitled to an award of temporary disability because he was capable of working modified duty, but did not work. Applicant contends that defendant failed to offer modified work within applicant’s work restrictions. We have received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that we deny reconsideration or grant reconsideration to amend the findings of fact to find that defendant offered appropriate work to applicant. Thereafter, we issued an order granting the petition, pending further review of the entire record. Subsequently, the parties successfully participated in a voluntary mediation at the Appeals Board. On July 16, 2026, the parties advised that a proposed settlement by stipulation and order had been reached, and requested return of the matter to the trial level for review of the proposed settlement.
The same issues, filtered across the whole corpus — or paste your own facts and let the search rank by factor match.
About this page
- A published decision of the California Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, taken apart by what it turned on. The Board publishes the decision itself; this page adds the extraction and quotes the passage behind every claim.
- The injured worker is not named here, and the case caption is not printed. Physicians appear as the decision names them, because a medical opinion is an act in a public proceeding.
- Issues, outcomes and weights were extracted by AI and released only where the source passage checked. Read the official decision before relying on anything here. Not legal advice.
- If you are named in this decision and want this page removed, write to privacy@similarcase.com.