What the panel ordered
Petition for removal granted; July 10, 2025 order setting matter for trial rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings
Petition for removal from the order setting the matter for trial issued on July 10, 2025, by the WCJ
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 Appeals Board grants removal because the petitioner showed that substantial prejudice or irreparable harm would result if removal was not granted, and reconsideration would not be an adequate remedy, supported by the WCJ's acknowledgment that additional discovery is warranted.
From the decision · page 1Applicant contends that further discovery is needed. We have not received an Answer from defendant. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we grant removal, rescind the July 10, 2025 order, and return this matter to the trial level for further proceedings. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Removal and the contents of the WCJ's Report. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in the WCJ's Report, we will grant removal and as our Decision After Removal, we will rescind the July 10, 2025 order setting the matter for trial level and return this matter to the trial for further proceedings. Removal 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 substantial 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