What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration denied; petition for removal granted; WCJ's F&O affirmed as amended to find applicant entitled to choose QME specialty, chiropractic specialty appropriate, and stay of chiropractic panel rescinded.
Applicant sought reconsideration of the WCJ's Findings and Order dated March 2, 2026, regarding injury and QME panel specialty; the WCAB treated the petition as one for removal and reconsideration, ultimately granting removal and amending the F&O.
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.
Defendant's strike letter did not contain any objection to the QME panel specialty, so defendant waived its right to object; applicant was entitled to choose the specialty and chiropractic was appropriate.
From the decision · page 7Not only does the letter not explicitly refer to objection, it does not contain any objection whatsoever. Applicant is entitled to retain the control of the QME process and did nothing to lose that control. Thus, defendant waived its right to an objection.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Defendant's strike letter did not contain any objection to the QME panel specialty.
Favours Applicant prevailed
This omission constituted waiver of the right to object, entitling applicant to choose the specialty.
From the decision · page 7Not only does the letter not explicitly refer to objection, it does not contain any objection whatsoever. Applicant is entitled to retain the control of the QME process and did nothing to lose that control. Thus, defendant waived its right to an objection.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
California Code of Regulations sections 31.1(b), 31.5(a)(10)
A party waives objection to QME panel specialty if not raised at the time of strike; applicant entitled to choose specialty if defendant does not object.
Applied to find defendant waived objection and applicant entitled to chiropractic QME panel.
From the decision · page 84. The specialty of Chiropractic as to QME Panel # 7790463 is appropriate under California Code of Regulations sections 31.1(b) and 31.5(a)(10).
What proof carried it
The evidence the panel weighed, by kind.
Defendant's March 21, 2025 strike letter did not contain any objection to the QME panel specialty.
From the decision · page 7Not only does the letter not explicitly refer to objection, it does not contain any objection whatsoever. Applicant is entitled to retain the control of the QME process and did nothing to lose that control. Thus, defendant waived its right to an objection.
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.