What the panel ordered
Petition for removal dismissed as moot because the challenged order was self-rescinding upon objection and no longer in effect.
Defendant State Compensation Insurance Fund filed a petition for removal from a WCJ order to serve medical records on a cost petitioner. The WCJ recommended dismissal as the order was self-rescinding upon objection, and the Appeals Board reviewed the petition and WCJ's report.
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 order being challenged was self-rescinding upon objection, so there was no longer an order from which removal could be sought, rendering the petition moot.
From the decision · page 1Defendant contends that order is improper for various reasons. We have not received an answer from cost petitioner. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we dismiss removal because defendant filed an objection to the order, which included a self-destruct clause upon the filing of such an objection. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ's Report. Based on our review of the record and for the reasons discussed in the WCJ's Report, we will dismiss the Petition for Removal as moot. Here, the petition for removal challenges the December 2, 2024 order. However, by the very terms of that order it was to be set for hearing upon receipt of a timely objection. There is presently no order from which removal can be sought. We would further note that it is permissible, and perhaps in cases like these encouraged, for the WCJ to issue a formal order rescinding an offending order and to set the matter for hearing upon receiving a petition for removal. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(d).)