Los Angeles County Laura Huesca WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIALAURA HUESCA, Applicant,vs.LOS ANGELES COUNTY; Defendant.Case No. ADJ3703279 (LAO 0831096)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Lien claimant, Edwin Haronian, M.D., seeks reconsideration of the “order served June 27, 2011, where it was ordered that lien claimant’s lien be dismissed, for failure to timely object to ‘notice of intention to dismiss liens”‘. In fact, no order dismissing lien has issued. In a Notice of Intention to Dismiss Lien, issued June 27, 2011, the WCJ gave notice to petitioner that “the aforesaid lien will be dismissed ten days after service hereof unless good cause to the contrary is shown in writing within said time.” However, no order dismissing lien has issued. Petitioner contends that the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) erred by issuing an order on June 27, 2011, dismissing petitioner’s lien for failure to respond to the notice of intention. Petitioner further contends that services were rendered to applicant and that the lien should be paid by defendant. In the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (Report), dated August 1, 2011, the WCJ stated at page 2: “There is no order dismissing the lien of Dr. Haronian. There is only a notice of intention to dismiss the lien of Dr. Haronian. There is no default judgment to set aside.” Based upon our review of the record, and for the reasons set forth herein, we will dismiss lien claimant’s Petition for Reconsideration because there is no final order which is subject to reconsideration. , At the outset, we note that reconsideration may be had only of a final order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code, § 5900.) The WCJ’s Notice of Intention to Dismiss Lien, does not constitute a final order within the meaning of Section 5900. An order which does not dispose of the substantive rights and liabilities of thos
