CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petitions for reconsideration. One petition was dismissed as untimely, as it sought to challenge a 2017 decision nearly six years later. The other petition was denied because the applicant failed to prove his claims of industrial injury to the lumbar spine and entitlement to temporary disability, and a discrimination claim under Labor Code section 132a was also untimely. The Board adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge, who found the applicant's allegations regarding renal failure to be precluded by prior adjudication and his lumbar spine claims unsupported by substantial evidence.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the applicant's petitions for reconsideration. One petition was dismissed as untimely, as it sought to challenge a 2017 decision nearly six years later. The other petition was denied because the applicant failed to prove his claims of industrial injury to the lumbar spine and entitlement to temporary disability, and a discrimination claim under Labor Code section 132a was also untimely. The Board adopted the findings of the workers' compensation administrative law judge, who found the applicant's allegations regarding renal failure to be precluded by prior adjudication and his lumbar spine claims unsupported by substantial evidence.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.