CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration and dismissed their petition for removal. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge, who recommended denial. The defendant's arguments, including claims that utilization review (UR) denials were not defective and that Dr. Light's reports were inadmissible, were rejected. The Board found the UR process was procedurally deficient due to the defendant failing to provide all relevant medical records.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the defendant's petition for reconsideration and dismissed their petition for removal. The Board adopted the findings of the Administrative Law Judge, who recommended denial. The defendant's arguments, including claims that utilization review (UR) denials were not defective and that Dr. Light's reports were inadmissible, were rejected. The Board found the UR process was procedurally deficient due to the defendant failing to provide all relevant medical records.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.