Spencer Addeman WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARI)STATE OF CALIFORNIASPENCER ADDEMAN. Applicant,vs.CEMEX; GALLAGHER BASSETT. Defendants.Case No. ADJ7371497OPINION AND ORDERS DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION AND DENYING PETITION FOR REMOVAL Lien claimant Samer Alaiti. M.D., seeks to “set aside”1 the workers’ compensation administrative law judge’s minute order taking the matter off calendar on November 18,2019 (Order). The Order noted that the court had-no jurisdiction over the lien because lien claimant failed to comply with Labor Code2section 4903.05(c). Lien claimant contends that the requirements of section 4903.05(c) docs not bar its claim and that it is entitled to proceed to hearing on the merits of its claim. Defendant filed an Answer. The WCJ filed a Report and Recommendation on Petition for Removal (Report) recommending that we deny lien claimant’s Petition. We have considered the allegations of the Petition, the Answer and the contents of the report of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and as discussed below, we will dismiss the petition to the extent it seeks reconsideration and deny it to the extent it seeks removal. A petition for reconsideration may only be taken from a “final” order, decision, or award. (Lab. Code. §§ 5900(a). 5902. 5903.) A “final*’ order has been defined as one that cither “determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case” (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.AppJd 1 Petitioner titled the Petition -Petition to Set Aside the Minutes of Hearing/Order of 11/1 »0019.”2 All subsequent statutory references are to the Labor Code unless otherwise noted. , 1171, 1180; Safeway Stores; Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 534-535 (45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410. 413J; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd (Kramer)
