TAHOE VISTA LLC; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND, BERNARD BONAVITA, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIABERNARD BONAVITA, Applicant,vs.TAHOE VISTA LLC; UNINSURED EMPLOYERS FUND, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ2283092 (SAC 0351262)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Applicant, in pro per, seeks reconsideration of the State of California, Uninsured Employers Fund (UEF), claims handling in his individual case. Applicant’s petition consists entirely of the statement: “UEF has not contacted or notified applicant of its decision regarding benefits, after being joined on August 29, 2008. Applicant has not received payment of benefits. UEF failed to respond to applicant’s Request for Discretionary Payments, dated October 16, 2008.” Based upon our review of the record, and for the reasons set forth herein, we will dismiss applicant’s petition because there is no final order which is subject to reconsideration. Furthermore, we will return this matter to the trial level so that the WCJ may conduct a status conference with the objective of moving applicant’s claim to conclusion. At the outset, we note that reconsideration may be had only of a final order, decision, or award. (Labor Code section 5900.) An order, which does not dispose of the substantive rights and liabilities of those involved in a case, is not a final order. (2 California Workers’ Compensation Practice, Cal. CEB 4th Ed., 2007, sections 21.8 – 21.9, pp. 1605-1607.) A “final” order has been defined as one which determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068; 65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650; , Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528; 45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 39; 43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661.) In this ma
