JOHNSON PUMP COMPANY, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE 9 FUND, JOSE ALFREDO SABINO, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJOSE ALFREDO SABINO, Applicant,vs.JOHNSON PUMP COMPANY, INC.; STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ3515970 (SAL 0120597)ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING REMOVAL We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and Removal, and reviewed the record in this matter. Reconsideration may be had only of a final order, decision, or award. (Labor Code section 5900.) Interlocutory procedural orders are not final orders within the meaning of 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 California Workers’ Compensation Practice, Cal. CEB, 4th Ed., 2000, section 21.8 – 21.9, pp. 1273 – 1275.) A “final” order has been defined as one “whichdetermines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case.” (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410, 413; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3rd 39, 43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661.) Workers’ compensation administrative law judges’ (WCJ) pre-trial orders regarding evidence, discovery, trial setting and/or venue are interlocutory orders which do not determine the substantive rights of the parties, and therefore are not final orders subject to reconsideration. (Jablonski v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1987) 52 Cal.Comp.Cases 399, writ denied; Beck v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. , (1979) 44 Cal.Comp.Cases 190, writ denied.) Accordingly, as the Order here to attend medical evaluation is not final for purposes of reconsideration, the petition must be dismissed. Insofar as petitioner seeks removal unde
