MARVIN WEATHERBEE dba BEELINE TRANSPORTATION UEBTF; KIEWIT INFRASTRUCTURE (special appearance) CHRISTOPHER TOMS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIACHRISTOPHER TOMS, Applicant,vs.MARVIN WEATHERBEE dba BEELINE TRANSPORTATION UEBTF;KIEWIT INFRASTRUCTURE (special appearance), Defendants.Case No. ADJ6540543(Redding District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Defendant, the Uninsured Employers Benefits Trust Fund (UEBTF), filed a Petition for Reconsideration on July 27, 2012 seeking reconsideration of the June 19, 2011 Minutes of Hearing wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) stated in the “Other/Comments” section that “Bee Line Transportation to provide discretionary benefits through UEBTF.”1 The WCJ personally served the June 19, 2012 Minutes of Hearing on all parties present at the hearing. UEBTF contends that the WCJ was without power to issue the June 19, 2011 Order. We have not received an Answer from the applicant. The WCJ has filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) recommending that the Petition for Reconsideration be denied. We will dismiss defendant’s Petition for Reconsideration because it is untimely. To be timely, a petition for reconsideration must be filed and received by the Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board (the Board) within twenty days of the date the final order in question issued, plus an additional five days if service of the decision is made by mail upon an address in California. (Lab. Code, § 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10507 [Appeals Board Rule 10507].) In this case, defendant’s Petition for 1 It is unclear whether this is an order. An order mandates an action. Although we cannot reach this issue because defendant’s petition is untimely, an order tat a party do something at the party’s discretion may have no practical effect. , Reconsideration was filed on July 27, 2012, more than twenty d
Menu
