What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration granted; Order of Dismissal rescinded and matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings.
Applicant petitioned for reconsideration of the WCJ's Order of Dismissal for lack of prosecution in two consolidated cases.
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 timely objected to dismissal and demonstrated ongoing medical treatment and willingness to proceed; the WCJ should have sustained the objection or set the matter for hearing rather than dismissing the cases.
From the decision · page 6Based on the scant record before us, when applicant filed the first written objection to dismissal on August 15, 2024, the WCJ should have either sustained the objection, dismissing defendant's petition, or set the matter for hearing. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10550, 10832.)
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
Applicant timely objected to dismissal and demonstrated ongoing medical treatment and willingness to proceed.