Chevron Products Company; Chevron Corporation Hector Saldana WORKERS-COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAHECTOR SALDANA, Applicant,vs.CHEVRON PRODUCTS COMPANY; CHEVRON CORPORATION, Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ7280681OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL Chevron Products Company, as insured by Chevron Corporation (defendam) seeks reconsideration or. in the alternative, removal of the order taking expedited hearing off calendar (Order) issued in this case by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on October 13.2010. Defendant contends that the Order issued in error because the WCJ lacked the authority to remove the expedited hearing scheduled in this case from the calendar absent an agreement by applicant to pay die costs of die medical treatment he has self-procured outside of defendant’s Medical Provider Network (MPN). Further, defendant claims that die Order will result in significant prejudice and irreparable harm unless removal is granted because it is deprived of an expedited opportunity to litigate the issue of applicant’s entitlement to treat outside of its MPN. 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. We have not received an answer from applicant. Based upon our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below, we will dismiss defendant’s petition for reconsideration. In addition, wc will deny the petition for removal.qIt is well settled that reconsideration may be had only of a final order, decision or award. (Labor Code section 5900). The October 13. 2010, Order docs not constitute a final order within , the meaning of Labor Code section 5900. An order which does not dispose of the substantive rights and liabilities of those involved in a case, is not a final order. (2 C
