What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration dismissed for defective service and failure to cure; admonishment issued to petitioner for false statements and misrepresentations.
Petition for Reconsideration filed by lien claimant Alan Moelleken, M.D./Spine & Ortho Center on June 29, 2021, considered with the WCJ report and record.
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.
Petition for Reconsideration was dismissed because it was filed without proof of service on all adverse parties as required by law, and the petitioner failed to cure the defective service despite being alerted to it.
From the decision · page 1The Petition for Reconsideration was filed without proof of service on all adverse parties as required by Labor Code1 section 5905. (Lab. Code, § 5905; see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10940(c); 10625.) Petitioner failed to serve applicant, applicant's attorney, and the other lien claimants on the Official Address Record, including Duran Interpreting Services, which provided services during the disputed treatment of applicant by petitioner.