CENDANT MOBILITY; permissibly self-insured, adjusted by GAB ROBBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; ELAINE ADAMSON, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAELAINE ADAMSON, Applicant,vs.CENDANT MOBILITY; permissibly self-insured, adjusted by GAB ROBBINS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ2621517 (ANA 0345908)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings and Award of December 19, 2008, in which the workers’ compensation judge (WCJ) found, in relevant part, that on June 30, 2000, applicant sustained industrial injury to her psyche, neck, headaches, and both upper extremities, that applicant is 100% permanently and totally disabled as a result of her orthopedic injuries, and that Dr. Simpkin’s medical opinion is not substantial evidence of apportionment. Defendant contends, in substance, that the evidence does not justify the WCJ’s finding of permanent and total disability, and that the WCJ erred in not finding apportionment to pre- existing non-industrial causation under Labor Code section 4663. Applicant filed an answer. We adopt and incorporate the “Statement of Facts” (Section II) of the WCJ’s Report, which the relevant facts. We do not adopt or incorporate the remainder of the Report. Regarding apportionment, the WCJ followed Dr. Freeman, the primary treating physician, who found no basis for apportionment. It appears, however, that the WCJ applied the “old rules” of apportionment, not the principles of SB 899 apportionment. The WCJ states in her Report that “applicant did not have any prior disability and there was no concrete medical evidence or medical records that showed that this applicant had pre-existing disease or pathology that would , have become disabling at an ascertainable date due to natural progression.” In Escobedo v. Marshalls (2005) 70 Cal. Comp. Cases 604 [Appeals Board en bane], however, the Boar
