What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration by Defendant Travelers Insurance Company is denied.
Defendant Travelers Insurance Company seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the WCJ on December 2, 2021, which the WCAB panel denies.
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.
AOE/COEApplicant prevailedneck · shoulders · wrists · hands
The WCJ and WCAB found the preponderance of evidence supports that applicant's complaints to neck, shoulders, and upper extremities were related to employment.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
AOE/COEDefendant prevailedlow back
The WCJ found applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back, which was not disturbed on reconsideration.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
The WCJ found 47% permanent disability caused by the injury, which was not disturbed on reconsideration.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
The WCJ found applicant was temporarily totally disabled during the period, supported by Dr. Uwaydah's summary of treatment reports, and Travelers did not rebut this evidence.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Preponderance of evidence supports that applicant's complaints to neck, shoulders, and upper extremities were related to employment.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This supported the finding of injury AOE/COE to these body parts.
From the decision · page 3[T]he preponderance of the evidence supports the findings of Drs. Fisher and Tabibian that Applicant's complaints to the neck, shoulders and upper extremities were related to the seven years of employment with the Defendant [Anthony International Inc.]. (Report, p. 4.) As to the issue of temporary disability, the permanent and stationary report from Dr. Uwaydah summarized the reports of applicant's medical treatment between 2003 and 2006. The doctor's summary of the treatment reports (App. Exh. 3, pp. 4 § 10) indicates the applicant was temporarily disabled during the period for which the WCJ awarded temporary disability indemnity benefits. Travelers did not offer evidence at trial to rebut the WCJ's opinion regarding the period that applicant was temporarily totally disabled and we see no basis for disturbing the F&A. Finally, having researched the issue extensively, we find no statutory or case law that supports Travelers' argument that Dr. Uwaydah's report should excluded from evidence and/or that his report "can not be relied upon." (Petition, p. 7.) Accordingly, we deny reconsideration.
Dr. Uwaydah's summary of treatment reports indicated applicant was temporarily disabled during the awarded period.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This supported the award of temporary total disability benefits.
From the decision · page 3[T]he preponderance of the evidence supports the findings of Drs. Fisher and Tabibian that Applicant's complaints to the neck, shoulders and upper extremities were related to the seven years of employment with the Defendant [Anthony International Inc.]. (Report, p. 4.) As to the issue of temporary disability, the permanent and stationary report from Dr. Uwaydah summarized the reports of applicant's medical treatment between 2003 and 2006. The doctor's summary of the treatment reports (App. Exh. 3, pp. 4 § 10) indicates the applicant was temporarily disabled during the period for which the WCJ awarded temporary disability indemnity benefits. Travelers did not offer evidence at trial to rebut the WCJ's opinion regarding the period that applicant was temporarily totally disabled and we see no basis for disturbing the F&A. Finally, having researched the issue extensively, we find no statutory or case law that supports Travelers' argument that Dr. Uwaydah's report should excluded from evidence and/or that his report "can not be relied upon." (Petition, p. 7.) Accordingly, we deny reconsideration.
No evidence was offered by Travelers to rebut the WCJ's opinion on temporary total disability period.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This lack of rebuttal supported affirming the temporary disability award.
From the decision · page 3[T]he preponderance of the evidence supports the findings of Drs. Fisher and Tabibian that Applicant's complaints to the neck, shoulders and upper extremities were related to the seven years of employment with the Defendant [Anthony International Inc.]. (Report, p. 4.) As to the issue of temporary disability, the permanent and stationary report from Dr. Uwaydah summarized the reports of applicant's medical treatment between 2003 and 2006. The doctor's summary of the treatment reports (App. Exh. 3, pp. 4 § 10) indicates the applicant was temporarily disabled during the period for which the WCJ awarded temporary disability indemnity benefits. Travelers did not offer evidence at trial to rebut the WCJ's opinion regarding the period that applicant was temporarily totally disabled and we see no basis for disturbing the F&A. Finally, having researched the issue extensively, we find no statutory or case law that supports Travelers' argument that Dr. Uwaydah's report should excluded from evidence and/or that his report "can not be relied upon." (Petition, p. 7.) Accordingly, we deny reconsideration.
What the panel did with the medical opinions
The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.
QMERelied upon · Physical medicine and rehabilitation
Supported that applicant's complaints to neck, shoulders, and upper extremities were related to employment and temporary total disability period.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
QMERejected · Orthopedic
Evaluated applicant but reports were argued by defendant as substantial evidence against cumulative injury claim; not accepted by WCAB.
From the decision · page 1Travelers contends that Dr. Sam Tabibian's reporting is not substantial medical evidence, that the reports from Dr. Lee Silver are substantial evidence that applicant did not sustain a cumulative injury, that Dr. David Fisher served as the qualified medical examiner (QME) in regard to the specific injury only so his reports are not evidence regarding the cumulative injury claim, that the trial record contains no evidence that applicant was temporarily totally disabled during the period from October 13, 2004, through November 22, 2006, and that "any reports issued by Dr. Munir Uwaydah must be thrown out" because he had been "indicted for committing fraud." (Petition, p. 7.)
QMERelied upon · Orthopedic
Supported that applicant's complaints to neck, shoulders, and upper extremities were related to employment; reports on specific injury only, not cumulative injury claim.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
PTPRelied upon · Orthopedic
Summarized treatment reports indicating applicant was temporarily disabled during the awarded period; report was challenged but accepted by WCAB.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 4660
Applied to determine permanent disability rating.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
Labor Code section 4656(c)(1)
Applied to limit temporary total disability benefits to 104 weeks.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
Labor Code section 3202.5
Applied to determine injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment.
From the decision · page 1Defendant, Travelers Insurance Company (Travelers) seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award (F&A) in case number ADJ1635654 issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 2, 2021, wherein the WCJ found in pertinent part that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE) to his neck, shoulders, wrists, and hands; that applicant did not sustain injury AOE/COE to his low back; that applicant was temporarily totally disabled for the period from October 13, 2004, through October 11, 2006 (subject to the Labor Code section 4656(c)(1) 104 week limitation); and that the injury caused 47% permanent disability.
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
treatment coursefavours Applicant prevailed
Dr. Uwaydah's summary of treatment reports indicating temporary total disability during the awarded period
From the decision · page 3[T]he preponderance of the evidence supports the findings of Drs. Fisher and Tabibian that Applicant's complaints to the neck, shoulders and upper extremities were related to the seven years of employment with the Defendant [Anthony International Inc.]. (Report, p. 4.) As to the issue of temporary disability, the permanent and stationary report from Dr. Uwaydah summarized the reports of applicant's medical treatment between 2003 and 2006. The doctor's summary of the treatment reports (App. Exh. 3, pp. 4 § 10) indicates the applicant was temporarily disabled during the period for which the WCJ awarded temporary disability indemnity benefits. Travelers did not offer evidence at trial to rebut the WCJ's opinion regarding the period that applicant was temporarily totally disabled and we see no basis for disturbing the F&A. Finally, having researched the issue extensively, we find no statutory or case law that supports Travelers' argument that Dr. Uwaydah's report should excluded from evidence and/or that his report "can not be relied upon." (Petition, p. 7.) Accordingly, we deny reconsideration.
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.