TWENTY FOUR SEVEN SECURITY ROLANDO LEMUS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAROLANDO LEMUS , Applicant,vs.TWENTY FOUR SEVEN SECURITY, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ7192030OPINION AND ORDERSDISMISSING PETITION FORRECONSIDERATION ANDDENYING PETITION FORREMOVAL Rolando Lemus (applicant), seeks reconsideration or, in the alternative, removal of the order issued by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on July 8. 2010. granting defendant’s request for a continuance of the July 19, 2010 priority conference on account of defense counsefs unavailability on the scheduled hearing date. Applicant contends that the WCJ erred in granting defendant’s request for a continuance of the priority conference from July 19. 2010 to August 9. 2010 because applicant did not agree to continue the matter and because defendant did not demonstrate good cause in support of its request for a continuance.–• . . , . . _ — ….— We have considered the allegations of the petition for reconsideration or, alternatively, petition for removal: the answer and the amended answer filed by defendant; and the contents of the report and recommendation on petition for removal (Repon) of the WCJ. Based upon our review of the record and for the reasons discussed below’, we will dismiss applicant’s petition for reconsideration. In addition, treating applicant’s petition as a petition for removal, we will deny h.RELEVANT FACTS On March 15. 2010. an application for adjudication of claim was filed at the Los Angeles District Office in which it was alleged that applicant, bom January 19, 1983, while employed by , defendant as a security guard on December 16, 2008, sustained an injury arising out of and occurring in the course of his employment to his back, neck, head and psyche. Defendant filed an answer to the application for adjudication of claim in which it asserted tha
