What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration denied
Petition for Reconsideration filed by defendant challenging Findings and Award dated 1/18/2022
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.
Permanent disability ratingApplicant prevailedlumbar spine · right knee · cervical spine
The WCJ found the report of Dr. Chan more reflective of the applicant's right knee impairment than the PQME Dr. Golden's report, and incorporated Dr. Golden's opinion for lumbar and cervical spine only, resulting in a 24% permanent disability rating with no apportionment.
From the decision · page 61. Applicant, age 44 at the time of injury, while employed during the period 4/19/2012 through 5/26/2016, occupation loader/unloader and group number "360", at Riverside, California, sustained injury arising out of and in the course of employment to his lumbar spine, cervical spine, right knee and psyche, but otherwise did not sustain injury in the form of headaches, hernia or pain.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.