ADJ19897089 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for Reconsideration is DENIED.

Petition for reconsideration of the Findings and Order issued on November 6, 2025, by the WCJ, reviewed and denied by the Appeals Board.

Read the official decision →

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.

Reconsideration / removalDefendant prevailed

The WCJ's decision included findings on threshold issues (injury and employment), making it a final order subject to reconsideration. The applicant's challenge to the QME's timely report and continued appointment was interlocutory and subject to removal standards, but no significant prejudice or irreparable harm was shown.

From the decision · page 4Here, the WCJ's decision includes findings that applicant sustained an admitted injury and regarding employment, which are threshold issues. Accordingly, the WCJ's decision is a final order subject to reconsideration rather than removal.

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

The WCJ's decision included findings on admitted injury and employment, which are threshold issues making the order final.

The rules the panel named

Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.

Lab. Code § 5909

A petition for reconsideration is deemed denied unless acted upon within 60 days from the date a trial judge transmits a case to the appeals board.

The Board acted within 60 days of transmission, so the petition was timely considered.

From the decision · page 1Preliminarily, former Labor section 59091 provided that a petition for reconsideration was deemed denied unless the Appeals Board acted on the petition within 60 days from the date of filing. (Lab. Code, § 5909.) Effective July 2, 2024, section 5909 was amended to state in relevant part that:

A petition for reconsideration may be taken only from a final order, decision, or award; interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions are not final orders.

The WCJ's findings on injury and employment were threshold issues making the order final; the QME-related orders were interlocutory.

Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a); Cortez v. WCAB; Kleemann v. WCAB

Removal is an extraordinary remedy, granted only if significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result and reconsideration is not an adequate remedy.

Applicant did not show significant prejudice or irreparable harm, so removal was denied.

From the decision · page 4Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 599, fn. 5 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155]; Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 280, fn. 2 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner ultimately issues. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a).)

ADJ19897089 · February 3, 2026

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

About this page