Metis Tps Llc; Insurance Company Of The West, Tony Thang Phung, WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIATONY THANG PHUNG,Applicant,vs.METIS TPS LLC; INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST,Defendants.Case Nos. ADJ9693295ADJ9797058(Los Angeles District Office)OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REMOVAL AND DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and/or Removal and the contents of the report and the opinion on decision of the workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, and for the reasons stated in the WCJ’s report and opinion on decision, both of which we adopt and incorporate, except for the paragraph that begins “By any measure…” on page 12 of the report, we will dismiss removal and deny reconsideration. As to the Petition for Removal, we note that Appeals Board Rule 10843 provides that in seeking removal a petitioner must “demonstrate that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy after the issuance of a final order, decision or award.” (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10843.) A “final” order has been defined as one that either “determines any substantive right or liability of those involved in the case” (Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1180; Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Pointer) (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 528, 534-535 [45 Cal.Comp.Cases 410, 413]; Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (Kramer) (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 39, 45 [43 Cal.Comp.Cases 661, 665]) or determines a “threshold” issue that is fundamental to the claim for benefits. (Maranian v. Workers’ Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1070, 1075 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650, 650- 651, 655-656].) In this case, the WCJ found that applicant sustained injury arising out of and occurring in the course of employment (AOE/COE). This is a threshold issue that consists of a final order. , Therefor
