CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision that he failed to meet his burden of proof for penalties and sanctions. The applicant claimed unreasonable delay and bad faith regarding authorization for Synvisc injections. The Board found the Utilization Review process was timely and, even if it had been delayed by one day, it was not unreasonable, especially since the employer ultimately authorized the treatment. Additionally, the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to strike an undisclosed exhibit that lacked probative value and was irrelevant to the current claim.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petition for reconsideration, upholding the WCJ's decision that he failed to meet his burden of proof for penalties and sanctions. The applicant claimed unreasonable delay and bad faith regarding authorization for Synvisc injections. The Board found the Utilization Review process was timely and, even if it had been delayed by one day, it was not unreasonable, especially since the employer ultimately authorized the treatment. Additionally, the Board affirmed the WCJ's decision to strike an undisclosed exhibit that lacked probative value and was irrelevant to the current claim.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.