What the panel ordered
The Appeals Board amended the Findings to find that the QME panel number 7336281 is invalid because the panel request was premature under Labor Code section 4062.2(b) and WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2).
Defendant sought removal of the Findings issued by the WCJ on December 28, 2020, challenging the validity of the QME panel request as premature.
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 panel request was premature because the applicant did not wait the required time under Labor Code section 4062.2(b) plus the additional mailing time under WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) due to the carrier's address being outside California but within the United States.
From the decision · page 6The WCJ in this matter concluded that applicant's panel request was not premature because he waited 16 days from the date of mailing of defendant's claim delay notice before submitting his request. This conclusion would be correct if the insurance carrier's address of record was within California and the applicable mailbox extension was five calendar days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(1). WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) extends the period for exercising any right by ten calendar days instead of five days from the date of service if the place of mailing of the party being served is outside of California but within the United States. The carrier's address of record is located in Kansas City, MO, i.e., outside of California but within the United States. Consequently, applicant was obligated to wait ten days from the date of mailing of the May 4, 2020 claim delay notice per section 4062.2(b) plus an additional ten days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) before requesting a panel. His panel request on May 20, 2020 was thus premature and the resulting panel is invalid.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant requested QME panel number 7336281 on May 20, 2020, only 16 days after defendant's May 4, 2020 claim delay notice mailing.
Favours Defendant prevailed
The panel request was premature under Labor Code section 4062.2(b) plus the additional 10 days required by WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) because the carrier's address was outside California but within the United States.
From the decision · page 6The WCJ in this matter concluded that applicant's panel request was not premature because he waited 16 days from the date of mailing of defendant's claim delay notice before submitting his request. This conclusion would be correct if the insurance carrier's address of record was within California and the applicable mailbox extension was five calendar days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(1). WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) extends the period for exercising any right by ten calendar days instead of five days from the date of service if the place of mailing of the party being served is outside of California but within the United States. The carrier's address of record is located in Kansas City, MO, i.e., outside of California but within the United States. Consequently, applicant was obligated to wait ten days from the date of mailing of the May 4, 2020 claim delay notice per section 4062.2(b) plus an additional ten days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) before requesting a panel. His panel request on May 20, 2020 was thus premature and the resulting panel is invalid.
The rules the panel named
Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Labor Code section 4062.2(b); WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2)
A party must wait until the first working day that is at least 10 days after the date of mailing of a request for a medical evaluation before requesting a QME panel, plus additional mailing time as per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) if the party being served is outside California but within the United States.
Applicant's QME panel request was premature because the carrier's address was in Kansas City, MO, requiring an additional 10 days waiting period under WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2).
From the decision · page 6The WCJ in this matter concluded that applicant's panel request was not premature because he waited 16 days from the date of mailing of defendant's claim delay notice before submitting his request. This conclusion would be correct if the insurance carrier's address of record was within California and the applicable mailbox extension was five calendar days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(1). WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) extends the period for exercising any right by ten calendar days instead of five days from the date of service if the place of mailing of the party being served is outside of California but within the United States. The carrier's address of record is located in Kansas City, MO, i.e., outside of California but within the United States. Consequently, applicant was obligated to wait ten days from the date of mailing of the May 4, 2020 claim delay notice per section 4062.2(b) plus an additional ten days per WCAB Rule 10605(a)(2) before requesting a panel. His panel request on May 20, 2020 was thus premature and the resulting panel is invalid.
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.