Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5902, 5903
A petition for reconsideration may properly be taken only from a "final" order, decision, or award.
The petition was dismissed because the order was not final as it resolved only intermediate procedural or evidentiary issues.
From the decision · page 1I.
We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of
the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto.
Based on our review of the record, the petition seeks reconsideration of a non-final order and will
be dismissed.
A 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.
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a)
The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted, and reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy.
The petition for removal was denied because the petitioner failed to show significant prejudice or irreparable harm and reconsideration was adequate.
From the decision · page 2Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 599, fn. 5 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155];
Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 280, fn. 2 [70
Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that
significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs.,
tit. 8, § 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate
that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner
ultimately issues. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a).) Here, based upon the WCJ's analysis of
the merits of the petitioner's arguments, we are not persuaded that significant prejudice or
irreparable harm will result if removal is denied and/or that reconsideration will not be an adequate
remedy. Therefore, treating the petition for reconsideration as one for removal, we will deny the
petition for removal.
Lab. Code, § 5311; Code Civ. Proc., § 641; WCAB Rule 10960
A party may seek to disqualify a WCJ upon grounds specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 641, including bias or fixed opinion, but must set forth detailed facts under penalty of perjury.
The petition for disqualification was denied because the petitioner did not provide sufficient verified facts and the WCJ's opinions were not fixed or biased.
From the decision · page 3Based on our review of the record and for the reasons stated in the WCJ's report, based upon the
WCJ's analysis of the merits of the petitioner's arguments, we will deny the Petition for
Disqualification.