Jorge Hinojosa vs. Best Coach Technologies; Chartis Insurance

is a case in which the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed a petition for reconsideration filed by lien claimant Advance Acupuncture Therapeutics. The petition was dismissed because it was not served on all adverse parties as required by Labor Code section 5905 as well as WCAB Rules 10505 and 10850. The Board also warned the hearing representative, National Provider Solutions, Inc., and lien claimant that they will face sanctions if they misrepresent the facts in any future petition.

Best Coach Technologies; Chartis Insurance Jorge Hinojosa WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDSTATE OF CALIFORNIAJORGE HINOJOSA, Applicant,vs.BEST COACH TECHNOLOGIES;CHARTIS INSURANCE, Defendants.Case No. ADJ8135969 (San Bernardino District Office)ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION             We have considered the allegations of lien claimant’s petition for reconsideration and we have reviewed the record in this matter. We will dismiss the petition because it was not served on all adverse parties as required by Labor Code section 5905 as well as WCAB Rules 10505 and 10850. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, §§ 10505, 10850.)            In addition, we warn hearing representative Jun Nolasco, “National Provider Solutions, Inc.” and lien claimant Advance Acupuncture Therapeutics that they will face sanctions, jointly and severally, if they misrepresent the facts in any future petition. Here they allege that “there was no proper notice of [the] December 5, 2012 lien conference and if there was proper notification, a clerical occurred [sic] as the conference date was not placed on Advanced Acupuncture Therapeutics’ calendar. ” To posit two mutually exclusive excuses for why it failed to appear at the December 5, 2012 lien conference is utterly frivolous and demonstrates that lien claimant has no intention of taking action to avoid missed hearings in the future. It also evidences disrespect for the system, WCJ, Appeals Board and clerical workers who have to process and respond to a petition, which is totally without merit. This conduct will not be condoned and in the future will result in the issuance of a notice of intent to impose sanctions pursuant to Labor Code § 5813./ / / ,             For the foregoing reasons,            IT IS ORDERED that said Petition for Reconsideration is DISMISSED.WORKERS’ COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD_________________________________________RONNIE G. CAPLANEI CONCUR,_________________________________________ALFONSO J. MORESI______________

To continue reading ... start a FREE Trial for 10 days

Discover the cases you didn’t know you were missing!

Copyright © 2023 - CompFox Inc.