State of California; SCIF State Employees Riverside Guillermo Canas WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAGUILLERMO CANAS, Applicant,vs.STATE OF CALIFORNIA; SCIF STATE EMPLOYEES RIVERSIDE, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ4698232 (RIV 0076516)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER RECONSIDERATION We previously granted the petition for reconsideration by defendant State of California Department of Social Services, In-Home Supportive Services, by and through its adjusting agent, State Compensation Insurance Fund (SCIF), to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. This is our Opinion and Decision After Reconsideration. SCIF sought reconsideration of our November 3, 2009 Opinion and Order Granting Petition for Reconsideration and Decision After Reconsideration, wherein we reversed the workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (WCJ) August 28, 2009 findings that California Insurance Guarantee Association’s (CIGA) claim is barred by laches and the statute of limitations, and that CIGA does not have standing to file a claim in this matter. SCIF contended that CIGA has no standing to file an application on behalf of Mr. Canas and Labor Code section 5501 does not support an application by a party who is not a real party in interest, that we erred in finding CIGA’s application not barred by the statute of limitations and/or the doctrine of laches, that our decision is not supported by substantial evidence and we failed to give great weight to the WCJ’s determination, that Labor Code section 5412 does not support the filing of an application in anticipation of a yet to be diagnosed injury, and that we failed to address “the pertinent issues raised in this case and whether a legally uninsured state agency is subject to , Insurance Code § 1063.1(9).” We have considered the Petition for Reconsideration and CIGA’s Answer, and we have reviewed the record in this matter. For the reasons expressed in our November 3, 20
