A. TEICHERT & SON, Permissibly Self- Insured, Adjusted By BRAGG & ASSOCIATES, DANIEL UNGUREANU, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIADANIEL UNGUREANU, Applicant,vs.A. TEICHERT & SON, Permissibly Self-Insured, Adjusted By BRAGG &ASSOCIATES, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ3204491 (SAC 0348071)ADJ1881599 (SAC 0348072)ADJ1315585 (SAC 0348073)ADJ1203378 (SAC 0348074)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION, GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL, AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL Defendant has filed a petition for both reconsideration and removal with regard to a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (“WCJ”) Findings and Order Re: Second QME Panel of October 27, 2008, wherein the WCJ found that “[t]he medical record in this case requires further development on the disputed issue of [pain management]; and a supplemental report or the deposition testimony of panel [qualified medical evaluator (“QME”) Mark Shelub, M.D.] will not sufficiently develop the record.” The WCJ further found that because Dr. Shelub’s report was not completed within 30-days of his examination of the applicant, the applicant was entitled to the appointment to a new panel QME. Defendant contends that the WCJ erred in finding that applicant was entitled to the appointment of another panel QME in the area of pain management. We have not received an answer, and the WCJ has filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal. As explained below, we will dismiss the defendant’s petition for reconsideration because it was not taken from a final order subject to reconsideration. However, because we find that the WCJ’s order has subjected the defendant to significant prejudice, we will grant the defendant’s petition for removal, and rescind the Findings and Order Re: Second QME Panel of October 27, 2008. , According to the WCJ’s Report: “Dr. Shelub saw the applicant at his office in Sacramento on March 7, 2007. The report he issued is dated Marc
Menu
