FIRST CLASS CONSTRUCTION; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, ARTURO OLIVARES, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAARTURO OLIVARES, Applicant,vs.FIRST CLASS CONSTRUCTION; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant.Case No. ADJ3490988 (MON0328106)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Applicant seeks reconsideration of a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (“WCJ”) Order Dismissing Case of April 28, 2009. In this matter, on April 13, 2005, applicant filed an application for adjudication of claim wherein he alleged that, while employed as a construction worker on February 10, 2004, he sustained industrial injury to his back, right wrist, right elbow, bilateral shoulders, right knee, right ankle, head, right lower extremity, right upper extremity, and to his nervous system. On March 16, 2009, the defendant filed a petition for dismissal pursuant to WCAB Rule 10582 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10582) requesting dismissal for lack of prosecution. Although the applicant filed an objection to the petition to dismiss on April 14, 2009, the WCJ dismissed the case on April 28, 2009. Applicant contends the WCJ erred in dismissing the case. We have not received an answer. Additionally, we do not have the benefit of the report contemplated by Appeals Board Rule 10860 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10860) because the WCJ who rendered the decision was on vacation. Nevertheless, because the requirement of a report is “directory rather than mandatory,” and because this opinion will discuss the relevant facts of the case and the reasons for our decision, the lack of a report is no impediment to the issuance of the decision set forth herein. (California Highway Patrol v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Clark) (1986) 178 Cal.App.3d 1016, 1019-1021 [51 Cal.Comp.Cases 123]; United Merchandising Corp. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Katz) (1987) 52 Cal.Comp.Cases 353 (writ denied).) , We will
Menu
