Eduwigis Rodriguez, vs. Advanced Component Taping, Inc.; Everest National Insurance Co., Administered By Acca/bhhc,

(ANA 0371488) is a case involving Advanced Component Taping, Inc., Everest National Insurance Co., administered by ACCA/BHHC, and Eduwigis Rodriguez. Lien claimant, Advanced Professional Imaging, sought reconsideration or removal of an order issued on July 27, 2009, directing Dr. Sim Hoffman to appear for a deposition and staying any lien issue pending completion of Dr. Hoffman's testimony. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed the petition for reconsideration and denied the petition for removal, finding that the order was not a final order and that the lien claimant had failed to establish that the order would result in significant prejudice or irreparable harm.

ADVANCED COMPONENT TAPING, INC.; EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., administered by ACCA/BHHC, EDUWIGIS RODRIGUEZ, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAEDUWIGIS RODRIGUEZ, Applicant,vs.ADVANCED COMPONENT TAPING, INC.; EVEREST NATIONAL INSURANCE CO., administered by ACCA/BHHC, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ3513941 (ANA 0371488)    OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR            Lien claimant, Advanced Professional Imaging (Lien Claimant) seeks reconsideration or, in the alternative, removal of the Order that issued in this case on July 27, 2009, directing Dr. Sim Hoffman to appear for a deposition and staying any lien issue pending completion of Dr. Hoffman’s testimony. Lien Claimant contends that the Order is final and will cause “immediate, pecuniary, and substantial injurious effect … ” to its property rights. Additionally, Lien Claimant contends that the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) who issued the Order failed to discuss the evidence relied on and the basis for the Order, in violation of Labor Code section 5315.            We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and/or Removal and the contents of the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report) of the WCJ. An answer has not been filed by defendant. For the reasons set forth below, we will dismiss the petition for reconsideration and deny the petition for removal.            Contrary to the assertion in the WCJ’s Report, the petition for reconsideration is timely. Labor Code section 5903 allows twenty days after service of a final order, decision, or award to file I a petition for reconsideration, and the time for filing may be extended five days for mailing (Code : of Civ. Proc., section 1013, Cal. Code of Regs., title 8, section 10507). A petition for reconsideration is deemed filed on the day it was actually received at the WCAB office, and not on , the date it was deposited i

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

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

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.