Carmen Ontiveros vs. Northridge Fitness.llc Dba Golds Gym And John Mahli As A Substantial Shareholder; Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust Fund

: Northridge Fitness, LLC dba Golds Gym and John Mahli as a substantial shareholder, and the Uninsured Employers Benefit Trust Fund were defendants in a workers' compensation case. The administrative law judge found that the applicant, Carmen Ontiveros, did not sustain an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of her employment. Ontiveros filed a petition for reconsideration, alleging two grounds in support of her petition. The petition was dismissed as it was untimely.

Northridge Fitness.LLc dba Golds Gym and John Mahli as a substantial shareholder; Uninsured Employers Benefit trust Fund Carmen Ontiveros WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD STATE OF CALIFORNIACARMEN ONTIVEROSApplicant, vs. NORTHRIDGE FITNESS, LLC dba GOLD’SGYM and JOHN MAHLi as a substantial shareholder; UNINSURED EMPLOYERSBENEFIT TRUST FUND, Defendant(s).Case Nos. ADJ4009736 (VNO 0497103) ADJ2906209 (VNO 0497100)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSINGPETITION FORRECONSIDERATION            Carmen Ontiveros, (applicant), seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Orders issued ineach of these cases by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on June 1, 2010. The decision in ADJ4009736 found thal applicant, while employed on November 15, 2003, as a janitor by defendam did not sustain an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of her employment, and ordered that she take nothing by way of the claim. The decision in ADJ2906209 found that applicant, while employed during the cumulative period from May 4. 2003 through May 4, 2004, as a janitor by defendant did not sustain an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of her employment.            Applicant alleges two grounds in support of her petition for reconsideration. First, she contends that she was denied due process of law because the WCJ was not an impartial decision maker. Second, she claims that the WCJ issued his decision more than 30 days after the cases were submitted for decision, in violation of Labor Code section 5313.            We have considered the allegations of the petition for reconsideration. However, based on our review of the record, the Report and Recommendation of the WCJ (Report), and the answer filed by Defendant, it appears the petition is untimely and must be dismissed. ,             Labor Code section 5903 allows twenty (20) days after service of a final order, decision, or award to file a petition for reconsideration, and the time for filing may be extended five (

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.