Kraft Foods; ESIS Sergio Pulido WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIASERGIO PULIDO, Applicant,vs.KRAFT FOODS; ESIS, Defendant(s).Case No. ADJ310227 (STK 0198911)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION Lien claimant, “National DrugWorks”, seeks reconsideration of the Order, issued January 25, 2010, wherein the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) ordered lien claimant to pay $777.50 in sanctions pursuant to Labor Code section 5813. The WCJ noted that there was “no good cause for the failure [of lien claimant] to appear” at the hearing which was set pursuant to lien claimant’s Declaration of Readiness to Proceed. The Order was served by mail upon lien claimant on January 25, 2010. In a letter filed March 8, 2010, lien claimant seeks reconsideration of the Order to pay sanctions arguing that lien claimant had previously sent a letter on January 4, 2010 “withdrawing our Declaration of Readiness to Proceed along with a proof of service.” Based upon our review of the record, and for the reasons set forth herein, we will dismiss lien claimant’s petition as untimely. At the outset, we note that there are 25 days allowed in which to file a petition for reconsideration from a final decision which has been served by mail upon an address in California (Lab. Code §§ 5900(a); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10507). The time limit set by Labor Code section 5903 for filing a petition for reconsideration is jurisdictional and the Appeals Board lacks the power to grant an untimely petition. (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171; Scott v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979, 46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008). The WCJ’s , decision was served by mail on January 25, 2010. Lien claimant’s petition was filed March 8, 2010. The petition is therefore untimely and must be dismissed. For the foregoing reasons, IT IS ORDERED that lien claimant’s Petition for Reconsider
