What the panel ordered
The Petition for Reconsideration filed on April 3, 2025, is dismissed as untimely and successive.
Applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration on August 12, 2024, which was dismissed as untimely and successive. Applicant filed a subsequent Petition for Reconsideration on April 3, 2025, which was also dismissed as untimely and duplicative.
This docket was decided more than once. Shown here is the latest released decision; we also hold October 14, 2024, July 1, 2024.
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.
Applicant's Petition for Reconsideration was filed beyond the 20-day deadline and was also successive and duplicative of a prior petition, leading to dismissal.
From the decision · page 3II. Turning now to the merits of the Petition, there are 20 days allowed within which to file for reconsideration from a "final" decision. (Lab. Code, § 5900(a), 5903.) This time limit is extended by 5 calendar days to allow for service upon an address within California. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605(a)(1).) It is further extended to the next business day if the last day for filing falls on a weekend or holiday. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10600.) To be considered timely, a petition for reconsideration must be filed with (i.e., received by) the WCAB within the time allowed; proof that the petition was mailed (posted) within that period is insufficient. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10940(a), 10615(b).) This time limit is jurisdictional and, therefore, the Appeals Board has no authority to consider or act upon an untimely petition for reconsideration. (Maranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1076 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650]; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1182; Scott v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979, 984 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008]; U.S. Pipe & 2 Foundry Co. v. Industrial Acc.