What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration dismissed; Petition for Removal granted; decision after removal deferred
Petition for Reconsideration or Removal filed by lien claimant AV Management regarding service of WCJ's September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting trial date
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.
The September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is not a final order and thus not subject to reconsideration; removal to the Appeals Board is granted as an extraordinary remedy under Labor Code section 5310.
From the decision · page 1On January 5, 2024, lien claimant, AV Management, filed a Petition for Reconsideration or in the Alternative Petition for Removal contending, in essence, that the September 28, 2023 Minute Order issued by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), which set this matter for trial was not properly served. We have considered the allegations of the Petitions and the contents of the Report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record and for the reasons stated below, we will dismiss the petition to the extent that it seeks reconsideration and we will grant removal on motion of the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (Appeals Board) pursuant to Labor Code section 5310.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The WCJ's September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is not a final order.
Favours Defendant prevailed
Because a petition for reconsideration may only be taken from a final order, the petition for reconsideration is dismissed.
From the decision · page 2Here, the WCJ's September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is not a final order. Accordingly, the petition will be dismissed to the extent it seeks reconsideration.
The Appeals Board has discretionary power under Labor Code section 5310 to remove proceedings to itself as an extraordinary remedy.
Favours Applicant prevailed
The Appeals Board granted removal on its own motion, deferring final decision after removal.
From the decision · page 2The Appeals Board is authorized under Labor Code section 5310 to remove to itself, as it deems necessary in any workers' compensation matter, "the proceedings in any claim." This power of removal is discretionary and is generally employed only as an extraordinary remedy. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843, subd. (a); Castro v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1996) 61 Cal.Comp.Cases 1460 (writ den.); Swedlow, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Smith) (1985) 48 Cal.Comp.Cases 476 (writ den.).)
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code sections 5900(a), 5902, 5903; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 39; Maranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068
A petition for reconsideration may only be taken from a final order, decision, or award; interlocutory procedural or evidentiary decisions are not final orders.
The WCJ's September 28, 2023 Minute Order setting the matter for trial is interlocutory and not a final order, so the petition for reconsideration is dismissed.
From the decision · page 1A petition for reconsideration may properly be taken only from a "final" order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code, § 5900(a), 5902, 5903.) A "final" order has been defined as one that either "determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case" (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1180; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 534-535 [45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410]; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 39, 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661])
Labor Code section 5310; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10843; Castro v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1996) 61 Cal.Comp.Cases 1460; Swedlow, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Smith) (1985) 48 Cal.Comp.Cases 476
The Appeals Board may remove proceedings to itself as an extraordinary remedy under Labor Code section 5310.
Removal is granted on motion of the Appeals Board as an extraordinary remedy.
From the decision · page 2The Appeals Board is authorized under Labor Code section 5310 to remove to itself, as it deems necessary in any workers' compensation matter, "the proceedings in any claim." This power of removal is discretionary and is generally employed only as an extraordinary remedy. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843, subd. (a); Castro v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1996) 61 Cal.Comp.Cases 1460 (writ den.); Swedlow, Inc. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Smith) (1985) 48 Cal.Comp.Cases 476 (writ den.).)
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.