What the panel ordered
Petition for disqualification of the WCJ deniedp. 4
Petition for disqualification of the WCJ filed by applicant on June 10, 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's Report and analysis found no grounds for disqualification based on bias or prejudice, and the petition was untimely and unsupported by specific facts.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks disqualification of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon the allegation that the WCJ is biased and prejudiced. We have not received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Disqualification (Report) recommending that we deny disqualification. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Disqualification and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits contained in the WCJ’s Report, we will deny disqualification. Labor Code 1 section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (§ 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has “formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated “[t]he existence of a state of mind … evincing enmity against or bias toward either party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)). Under WCAB Rule 10960, proceedings to disqualify a WCJ “shall be initiated by the filing of a petition for disqualification supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The petition for disqualification was not supported by specific facts establishing bias or prejudice by the WCJ.
Favours Defendant prevailed
Without specific factual allegations, the petition could not meet the legal standard for disqualification.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks disqualification of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon the allegation that the WCJ is biased and prejudiced. We have not received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Disqualification (Report) recommending that we deny disqualification. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Disqualification and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits contained in the WCJ’s Report, we will deny disqualification. Labor Code 1 section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (§ 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has “formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated “[t]he existence of a state of mind … evincing enmity against or bias toward either party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)). Under WCAB Rule 10960, proceedings to disqualify a WCJ “shall be initiated by the filing of a petition for disqualification supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury
The petition was untimely filed more than 10 days after the grounds for disqualification were known.
Favours Defendant prevailed
Timeliness is required by WCAB Rule 10960 and failure to comply is grounds for denial.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 5311; Code of Civil Procedure section 641; WCAB Rule 10960
A party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641, including bias or prejudice, and must file a timely petition supported by detailed facts under WCAB Rule 10960.
The petition was denied because it failed to show specific facts constituting grounds for disqualification and was untimely.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks disqualification of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon the allegation that the WCJ is biased and prejudiced. We have not received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Disqualification (Report) recommending that we deny disqualification. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Disqualification and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits contained in the WCJ’s Report, we will deny disqualification. Labor Code 1 section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (§ 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has “formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated “[t]he existence of a state of mind … evincing enmity against or bias toward either party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)). Under WCAB Rule 10960, proceedings to disqualify a WCJ “shall be initiated by the filing of a petition for disqualification supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
The WCJ's Report and Recommendation analyzed the petition and found no specific facts establishing bias or prejudice, and the petition was untimely filed.
From the decision · page 1Applicant seeks disqualification of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon the allegation that the WCJ is biased and prejudiced. We have not received an answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Disqualification (Report) recommending that we deny disqualification. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Disqualification and the contents of the WCJ’s Report. Based on our review of the record and based upon the WCJ’s analysis of the merits contained in the WCJ’s Report, we will deny disqualification. Labor Code 1 section 5311 provides that a party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon any one or more of the grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641. (§ 5311; see also Code Civ. Proc., § 641.) Among the grounds for disqualification under section 641 are that the WCJ has “formed or expressed an unqualified opinion or belief as to the merits of the action” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(f)) or that the WCJ has demonstrated “[t]he existence of a state of mind … evincing enmity against or bias toward either party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 641(g)). Under WCAB Rule 10960, proceedings to disqualify a WCJ “shall be initiated by the filing of a petition for disqualification supported by an affidavit or declaration under penalty of perjury
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.