SWEDA COMPANY, LLC; BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY YANFEN SITU WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAYANFEN SITU, Applicant,vs.SWEDA COMPANY, LLC; BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY, Defendants.Case No. ADJ1700843 (LAO 0888764)OPINION AND DECISION AFTER REMOVAL AND ORDER IMPOSING SANCTIONSON SJT & ASSOCIATES AND LILIBETH GOMEZ HATHAWAY, On September 7, 2012, we dismissed the Petition for Reconsideration filed by hearing representative Lilibeth Gomez on behalf of lien claimant SJT & Associates on the grounds that it was not timely filed and was not served on defendant’s counsel. We removed this matter to the Appeals Board on our own motion pursuant to Labor Code section 5310 and issued a Notice of Intention to Impose Sanctions (NIT) pursuant to Labor Code section 5813. This is our Opinion and Decision After Removal. In our September 7, 2012 decision, we issued an NIT giving notice that, under Labor Code section 5813 and Appeals Board Rule 10561 (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10561), we intended to impose sanctions of $250.00 against Ms. Gomez and SJT & Associates, jointly and severally, unless we received a written objection setting forth good cause as to why a sanction should not issue within 15 days of service. Our NIT was predicated upon the fact that the lien claimant and Ms. Gomez violated a number of important WCAB rules in their Petition for Reconsideration, making the imposition of sanctions appropriate. As noted in our prior opinion, they filed an untimely petition which was not served on defense counsel and which was indisputably without merit. Ms. Gomez and SJT & Associates had 15 calendar days plus an additional 5 calendar days for service by mail pursuant to WCAB Rule 10507(a)(1) within which to lodge any objections to the imposition of sanctions. The 20-day period afforded to Ms. Gomez and SJT & Associates expired on September 27, 2012. We expressly ordered that “any such written objection shall be filed only with the ,
