Garden Plating Co., Intercare Holdings Insurance Services, Jose Guillermina Rodriguez, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJOSE GUILLERMINA RODRIGUEZ,Applicant,vs.GARDEN PLATING CO., INTERCARE HOLDINGS INSURANCE SERVICES,Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ8588344 (MF) and Consolidated CasesOPINION AND ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES ON MOTION OF THE APPEALS BOARD AND DISMISSING PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION (En Banc) On or about September 14, 2017, numerous lien claimants by and through their sole representative Maximum Medical filed over 1,200 Petitions for Reconsideration1, challenging an administrative action which prevented them from filing in their cases because they had allegedly failed to timely file required declarations. Thereafter, to secure uniformity of decision in the future, the Chair of the Appeals Board, upon unanimous vote of its members, assigned these cases to the Appeals Board as a whole for an en banc decision. (Lab. Code, § 115.)2 Based upon our review of the relevant statutes and case law, we hold that: (1) The issue of the administrative action by DWC has now been rendered moot and the Petitions for Reconsideration must be dismissed. (2) The cases at issue are defined herein as: “The Cases Involving a Labor Code section 4903.05(c) Declaration filed after 5:00 p.m. on Friday, June 30, 2017 through 1 At the present time, we are aware of 1,234 petitions, but are unable to determine if additional petitions have been filed but left out of this count due to administrative constraints in the Electronic Adjudication Management System (EAMS).2 En banc decisions of the Appeals Board are binding precedent on all Appeals Board panels and WCJs. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10341; City of Long Beach v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Garcia) (2005) 126 Cal. App.4th 298, 313, fn. 5 [70 Cal.Comp.Cases 109]; Gee v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 1418 [67 Cal.Comp.Cases 236]; see also Gov. Code, § 11425.60(b)
