CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self-Insured, LUIS ORTIZ, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIALUIS ORTIZ, Applicant,vs.CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Permissibly Self- Insured, Defendants.Case No. ADJ2170527 (VNO 0494225)OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL Applicant has filed a petition for reconsideration of a workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s (“WCJ”) Order Taking Off-Calendar of May 6, 2009. Applicant had filed a Petition to Set Aside Order of Dismissal on March 3, 2009. The WCJ took the matter off-calendar at the May 6′ 2006 hearing, but the WCJ’s Order was not accompanied by any explanation as to why the matter was taken off-calendar. Applicant alleges in this case that, while employed as a warehouse laborer on March 4, 2004, he sustained industrial injury to his back and both legs. As explained below, an Order of Dismissal was issued on August 31, 2006. Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in not setting-aside the August 31, 2006 dismissal. We have received an answer, and the WCJ has filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration (“Report”). Although no explanation was originally given to taking the matter off-calendar, in the Report, the WCJ explains that the matter was taken off-calendar because there were “no current issues” (Report at p. 1) and that “as no [petition for reconsideration] was had {sic] within 25 days of the August 31, 2006 order [of dismissal] the time limit for action had passed and the Order of Dismissal was final.” (Report at p. 2.) The WCJ also stated that because more than five years have elapsed from the date of injury, under Labor Code § 5410 [sic], the WCAB no longer has jurisdiction to set-aside the Order of Dismissal. (Report at p. 3.) We have received an answer from the defendant. , Although the WCJ’s Report reveals that her order taking this matter offi-calendar was essentially a denial of the applicant’s petitio
