What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration granted; prior Findings and Award rescinded; new Findings and Award substituted finding 72% permanent disability without apportionment, awarding life pension and deferring attorney's fees issue.
Applicant sought reconsideration of the Findings and Award dated September 24, 2024, which found 64% permanent disability after apportionment; the WCJ prepared a Report and Recommendation to deny the petition, but the Appeals Board granted reconsideration and rescinded the prior F&A.
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 medical opinion on apportionment was found speculative and not substantial evidence; defendant did not meet burden to prove apportionment; therefore, apportionment was invalid and rejected.
From the decision · page 7(Escobedo, supra, 70 Cal. Comp. Cases at p. 621, emphasis added.) Here, Dr. Mahawar's medical reporting is not substantial medical evidence on the issue of
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.