Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel; Sedgwick Luz Valenzuela WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIA LUZ VALENZUELA, Applicant, vs. ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL; SEDGWICK, Defendants. Case No. ADJ2501766 (VNO 0561805) / ADJ3267577 (VNO 0561807) ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrativelaw judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, the petition is untimely and must be dismissed. There are 25 days allowed within which to file a petition for reconsideration from a “final” decision that has been served by mail upon an addressin California. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10507(a)(l).) This time limit is extended to the next business day ifthe last day for filing falls on a weekend or holiday. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10508.) To be timely, however, a petition for reconsideration must be filed with (i.e., received by) the WCAB within the time allowed; proof that the petition was mailed (posted) within that period is insufficient. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, §§ 10845(a), 10392(a).) This time limit is jurisdictional and, therefore, the Appeals Board has no authority to consider or act upon an untimely petition for reconsideration.(Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1076 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 656]; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211Cal.App.3d1171, 1182; Scott v Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979, 984 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008, 1011]; US. Pipe & Foundry Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Hinojoza) (1962) 201 Cal.App.2d 545, 549 [27 Cal.Comp.Cases 73, 75-76].)/ / // / / , The petition in this matter was filed on April 14, 2015. This was more than 25 days after the service of the WCJ’s March 18, 2015 decision andbeyond whatever exten
