What the panel ordered
The Petition for Reconsideration was denied as untimely and on the merits regarding the jurisdiction over the motorized wheelchair request.
Applicant filed a petition for reconsideration of the Joint Findings of Fact issued by the WCJ on January 20, 2026, which was dismissed by the WCAB on May 7, 2026. Applicant sought reconsideration of that dismissal, which was denied by the WCAB on July 1, 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.
Jurisdiction / venueDefendant prevailedupper extremities
The WCAB concluded that the request for a motorized wheelchair is a new and different treatment subject to utilization review, so the WCAB lacks jurisdiction to decide its medical necessity at this time.
From the decision · page 4Under California's workers' compensation system, questions relating to the medical necessity of a treatment requested by a physician are decided through a compulsory UR process. Section 4610 requires that employers establish a UR process and once a treating physician submits an RFA to an employer, the employer must either approve the treatment request or dispute the treatment request and submit the matter for review by a UR physician who then must determine, based on "medical necessity," whether to approve, modify, or deny the requested treatment. (§ 4610; State Comp. Ins. Fund v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Sandhagen) (2008) 44 Cal.4th 230, 241.)