Law Office of Saam Ahmadinia

What they litigate

Disputed issues across the decisions this firm is named in. Every row opens the decisions it counts.

Where they appear

• Van Nuys 13
• Los Angeles 8
• Oxnard 4
• Riverside 3
• San Francisco 2
• Bakersfield 1
• Los Angeles Office 1
• Marina del Rey 1
• Stockton 1

How the appealed decisions came out

These are decisions that were appealed and published — the tail of a system that mostly settles. Most claims end in a compromise and release or a stipulation and never reach a panel, so nothing below describes how this firm does its work. It describes how a set of appealed disputes came out.

• 20 for the applicant
• 11 for the defense
• 2 returned for more record

Counted over 33 appealed decisions. Not this firm’s book of work.

Decisions

Newest decisions this firm is named in, each with the passage the panel turned on and a link to the official PDF.

• ADJ17258260 · 2026-06-22 · San Francisco District OfficeMedical treatment / UR / IMRapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration and/or removal of the "Findings of Fact and Orders" (F&O) issued on March 18, 2026, by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that additional qualified medical evaluator (QME) panels in psychology and internal medicine were warranted and ordered the Medical Unit to issue additional panels accordingly.

  The WCJ found good cause for additional panels in psychology and rheumatology, which the Appeals Board upheld, denying defendant's petition for reconsideration.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ10790437 · 2026-05-08 · Riverside District OfficePsyche AOE/COEapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the February 9, 2026 Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration (ODAR), wherein the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) found in pertinent part, that: 1) the applicant, while employed during the period from November 1, 2011 through September 20, 2016 as a Charge Nurse, by Parkview Community Hospital sustained injury to her cervical spine and a dental injury arising out of and in the course of employment as a Charge Nurse; 2) lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center met its burden pursuant to Labor Code1 section 4620(a) to show that a contested claim existed when applicant was evaluated by Dr. Schames beginning on January 9, 2018; 3) lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center met its burden under section 4621 to show its services were reasonable and necessary at the time they were provided beginning on January 9, 2018; 4) lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center is entitled to payment under section 4622 for services it provided beginning on January 9, 2018, and deferred the amount owed. The WCAB also deferred the issue of whether lien claimant is entitled to payment for medical treatment provided to applicant.

  The WCAB found substantial medical evidence supporting that applicant sustained a dental injury arising out of and in the course of employment based on the medical reports of Dr. Mayer Schames and the repeated requests for dental specialist authorization by PTP Dr. Stokes. The lien claimant met its burden to show services were reasonable and necessary. The WCAB deferred the amount owed for medical treatment to trial level for further determination.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ11777176 · 2026-02-11 · Stockton District OfficeLiensapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1The WCJ found, in pertinent part, that the services of lien claimant, Dental Trauma Center, were reasonable and necessary and awarded lien claimant the balance of its lien with penalties and interest.

  The Board found the lien claimant's services reasonable and necessary, rejecting defendant's argument that diagnostic testing required separate utilization review authorization, and affirmed the WCJ's award of the lien balance with penalties and interest.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ10790437 · 2026-02-09 · Riverside District OfficeLiensmixed

  Determinative passage · p.10through September 20, 2016 as a Charge Nurse, by Parkview Community Hospital sustained injury to her cervical spine and a dental injury arising out of and in the course of employment as a Charge Nurse. 2. The issue of whether lien claimant The Dental Center is entitled to payment for medical treatment provided to applicant is deferred. 3. Lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center met its burden under Labor Code section 4620 to show a contested claim existed at the time it provided its services beginning on January 9, 2018. 4. Lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center met its burden under Labor Code section 4621 to show its services were reasonable and necessary at the time they were provided beginning on January 9, 2018. 5. Lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center is entitled to payment under Labor Code section 4622 for services it provided beginning on January 9, 2018, the issue of the amount owed, including interest and penalties, is deferred.

  Lien claimant met its burden to show a contested claim existed and its services were reasonable and necessary; entitlement to payment and amount owed deferred.

  Official decision · page 10 →
• ADJ18040257 · 2025-12-08 · Van Nuys District OfficeMedical treatment / UR / IMRapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.6The undersigned issued a Findings of Fact and Orders on 9/8/2025 finding that the selection made by Applicant on 6/23/2025 to use CNS as his primary treating physician was valid in that CNS was part of the carrier's MPN at the time of selection.

  The WCJ found and the Appeals Board upheld that the applicant validly selected CNS as his PTP from the carrier's MPN on 6/23/2025, when CNS was still on the MPN. The defendant's removal of CNS from the MPN after that date does not retroactively invalidate the selection or deny treatment.

  Official decision · page 6 →
• ADJ1408322 · 2025-08-04 · Los Angeles District OfficeMedical treatment / UR / IMRapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Order (F&O) issued on April 30, 2025 by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ). Therein, the WCJ found in part that the parts of body injured include the lumbar spine only, however, this does not limit the scope of treatment under Labor Code section 4600; applicant was entitled to coverage for treatment expense; the treatment provided by Sleep Treatment Clinic (lien claimant) was reasonably required; the record needs to be developed on the issue of whether the charges were reasonable; the Labor Code section 4903.05 Declaration was not false; lien claimant did serve a request for authorization (RFA); the defendant did not issue a timely utilization review response to the RFA; the defendant did not timely and properly defer utilization review; and the issue of disregarding the RFA of a secondary treater is not relevant.

  The WCJ found substantial evidence that the treatment provided by the lien claimant was reasonable and necessary to cure or relieve the effects of the industrial lumbar spine injury, supported by objective diagnostic studies and IMR determination.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ3776569 · 2025-05-14 · Los Angeles District OfficeLiensapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center (DTC) timely petitioned for reconsideration of the Amended Joint Findings and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 20, 2024. We granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues in this matter.

  The Board granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues and approved the stipulation resolving the lien.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ3776569 · 2025-05-14 · Los Angeles District OfficeLiensapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Lien claimant The Dental Trauma Center (DTC) timely petitioned for reconsideration of the Amended Joint Findings and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on December 20, 2024. We granted reconsideration to study the factual and legal issues in this matter.

  The WCAB granted reconsideration to study the lien issues and approved the stipulation resolving the lien, rescinding the prior WCJ order.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ12055950 · 2025-01-21 · Los Angeles District OfficeAOE/COEmixed

  Determinative passage · p.1Lien Claimant Dental Trauma Center (DTC) seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact and Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) in this matter on October 10, 2024. In that decision, the WCJ found that DTC did not prove that an industrial injury occurred in this case, and that they did not establish that they provided valid medical-legal services.

  The WCJ found no industrial injury based on the medical evidence, but the Appeals Board found the record incomplete and granted reconsideration to allow further review of the injury AOE/COE issue.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ9051748 · 2025-01-06 · Los Angeles Office District OfficeMedical treatment / UR / IMRapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Order (F&O) of October 10, 2024, wherein the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment to her back and bilateral hips while employed as a director for defendant. Additionally, the WCJ found applicant suffered injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment to her teeth and reasonably required the self-procured medical treatment furnished by The Dental Trauma Center. The value of the services of The Dental Trauma Center was found to be a reasonable amount based on the Official Medical Fee Schedule or other recognized valuation schedule for dental care costs, with jurisdiction reserved in the event of any dispute as to the proper reimbursement. Statutory increase and interest was found to be applied to the amounts found reasonable and remaining unpaid as provided in Labor Code1 section 4603.2(b)(2).

  The WCJ and WCAB found substantial medical evidence supporting industrial causation of applicant's dental injury and that defendant must pay for all reasonable and necessary dental treatment without apportionment, based on medical opinions and statutory law.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ12812938 · 2024-05-28 · Van Nuys District OfficeMedical treatment / UR / IMRapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.7As demonstrated above, the medical treatment by Mayer Schames, D.D.S., a California stock corporation doing business as The Dental Trauma Center, was reasonable and consistent with Labor Code § 4604.5. In addition, its medical reporting was reasonable in accordance with Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 9785. RECOMMENDATION: The undersigned WCJ respectfully recommends denial of the Defendant's petition for reconsideration dated April 5, 2024. Date: April 8, 2024

  The WCJ found the medical treatment reasonable and consistent with Labor Code 4604.5 based on Dr. Schames's detailed medical necessity opinion; the WCAB adopted and incorporated the WCJ's report and denied reconsideration.

  Official decision · page 7 →
• ADJ12590930 · 2024-03-05 · Bakersfield District OfficeQME/AME processapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.2On January 26, 2023, applicant filed a petition for additional panels in the field of dentistry, psychology, and internal medicine.

  The WCJ dismissed the petition without hearing or record, which was found to be an error as good cause for additional panels must be determined by the WCJ after a hearing and record development.

  Official decision · page 2 →

Also recorded as

The same firm is printed several ways across the decisions, and all of them were counted as one. This is every spelling behind the figures above.

• LAW OFFICE OF SAAM AHMADINIA, APC
• LAW OFFICE OF SAAM AHMADINIA
• LAW OFFICES OF SAAM AHMADINIA
• Law Office of Saam Ahmadinia
• LAW OFFICES OF SAAM AHMADINIA, APC
• Law Office of Saam Ahmadinia, APC
• LAW OFFICES OF SAAM AHMADINIA APC
• LAW OFFICE OK SAAM AHMADINIA

Is this your firm and something here is wrong? Tell us and we will fix it. Every figure on this page is a count of released decisions this firm is named in, and the decisions themselves are listed above with the passage each turned on.