CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. ADJ8153900
Regular
Mar 29, 2013

JAVIER LUCATERO vs. ADECCO USA, INC., STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA INSURANCE COMPANY

This case involves a petition for reconsideration filed by applicant Javier Lucatero regarding a January 4, 2013 decision. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) has granted this petition, acknowledging the need for further study of the factual and legal issues. This action is intended to ensure a complete understanding of the record and to allow for a just decision. All future communications must be filed in writing with the WCAB Commissioners' office, not with the Santa Ana District Office or through e-filing.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDJAVIER LUCATEROADECCO USAINC.STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA INSURANCE COMPANYADJ8153900Santa Ana District OfficeOPINION AND ORDER GRANTING RECONSIDERATIONPetition for Reconsiderationstatutory time constraints
References
0
Case No. Misc. No. 257
En Banc
Dec 16, 2015

vs. Javier Jimenez

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of its intention to suspend Javier Jimenez's privilege to appear as a representative for 180 days due to a pattern of misconduct, frivolous tactics, and failure to comply with sanction orders.

Labor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionAppeals Board en bancSanctionsBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsLien claimantsLabor Code section 5700 agentWCJDiscovery abuse
References
18
Case No. Misc. No. 257
Significant

vs. Javier Jimenez

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board issued a notice of intention to suspend Javier Jimenez's privilege to appear as a representative for 180 days, citing a pattern of bad-faith tactics, frivolous actions, and repeated failure to comply with sanction orders.

Labor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionWCAB en bancSanctionsBad-faith actionsFrivolous tacticsUnnecessary delayLien claimantsLabor Code section 5700 agentRepeated misconduct
References
18
Case No. Misc. No. 257
En Banc
Feb 18, 2016

vs. JAVIER JIMENEZ

The Appeals Board suspended the privilege of Javier Jimenez to appear as a representative for 180 days due to his failure to respond to a Notice of Intention to Suspend, which was based on non-compliance with prior sanction orders.

WCABLabor Code section 4907Representative privilege suspensionNotice of IntentionSanction ordersEn banc decisionAdministrative law judgeCompliance180-day suspensionFurther hearing
References
0
Case No. Misc. No. 257
Significant

vs. Javier Jimenez, Respondent

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board suspends the privilege of Javier Jimenez to appear as a party representative for 180 days, with the suspension continuing until he complies with prior sanction orders, following his failure to respond to a Notice of Intention.

WCABJavier JimenezRepresentative PrivilegeSuspensionLabor Code Section 4907En BancNotice Of IntentionSanction OrdersComplianceAdministrative Law Judges
References
1
Case No. ADJ3007363 (OXN 0133349), ADJ1569912 (OXN 0133350)
Regular
Apr 02, 2013

JAVIER VILLANUEVA, JAVIER VILLANUEVA-GOMEZ vs. PANDA RESTAURANT GROUP, INC., ESIS INSURANCE SERVICES COMPANY

This case involves Javier Villanueva appealing his workers' compensation award from Panda Restaurant Group. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration and affirmed the original decision, with one key amendment. The amended finding clarifies that Villanueva suffered 26% permanent disability in case ADJ1569912, entitling him to weekly payments totaling $18,823.75. Additionally, $2,823.50 is to be withheld from accrued indemnity pending resolution of attorney fee division between current and former counsel.

WORKERS' COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARDPANDA RESTAURANT GROUPESIS INSURANCE SERVICES COMPANYRECONSIDERATIONAMENDED DECISIONPERMANENT DISABILITYWEEKLY INDEMNITYSIMULTANEOUS COMMENCEMENTACCRUED INDEMNITYATTORNEY FEE DIVISION
References
0
Case No. ADJ7397148
Regular
Oct 15, 2013

JAVIER RODRIGUEZ vs. EMPLOYERS DEPOT, INC.

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied Javier Rodriguez's Petition for Reconsideration. Rodriguez alleged inadequate notice of a lien conference, claiming the hearing was improperly converted from a status conference. The Board adopted the WCJ's report, which found the hearing was automatically deemed a lien conference by regulation, requiring payment of a lien activation fee. The underlying case was previously resolved by a Compromise and Release.

Petition for ReconsiderationOrder DenyingCompromise and ReleaseLien ConferenceStatus ConferenceLien Activation FeeLabor Code §4903.06Cal. Code. Regs. §10770.1Declaration of ReadinessVenue
References
1
Case No. ADJ6759028 ADJ9793036
Regular
Sep 09, 2015

JAVIER MOYA vs. SLEEP TRAIN, THE HARTFORD

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) dismissed Javier Moya's petition for reconsideration because it was untimely filed. California law allows twenty-five days for filing, with extensions for weekends or holidays, but the petition was filed over four months after the WCJ's decision. Timeliness is a jurisdictional requirement, meaning the WCAB lacks authority to consider petitions filed outside this timeframe. Had the petition been timely, it would have been denied on the merits as per the WCJ's report.

Petition for ReconsiderationuntimelydismissaljurisdictionalWCAB Rule 10507WCAB Rule 10508WCAB Rule 10845WCAB Rule 10392proof of mailingproof of receipt
References
4
Case No. ADJ1136971 (STK 0213325)
Regular
Apr 14, 2014

JAVIER SOLIS vs. AMERON INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

This case concerns applicant Javier Solis' claim for psychiatric injury as a consequence of an admitted industrial injury. Defendant Ameron International Corporation sought to bar this claim, arguing it was untimely. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied defendant's petitions for reconsideration and removal. The WCAB held that applicant was not barred from bringing the psyche claim as it was a consequence of the original injury, and the defendant had prior notice and provided treatment for these symptoms. Furthermore, the WCAB affirmed the administrative law judge's order to develop the record on the psyche injury claim to ensure proper medical evidence.

compensable consequencepsyche injurystatute of limitationstollingsubstantial justiceprocedural backgroundpetition for reconsiderationpetition for removalDeclaration of Readiness to Proceedmandatory settlement conference
References
9
Case No. ADJ2023039 (POM 0295793)
Regular
Jan 11, 2018

JAVIER GUZMAN vs. FEDEX NATIONAL, CAMBRIDGE SACRAMENTO

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the Petition for Removal filed by the applicant, Javier Guzman. The WCAB adopted the report of the Workers' Compensation Administrative Law Judge (WCJ) as the basis for its denial. While acknowledging a factual inaccuracy in the WCJ's report regarding the Agreed Medical Examiner, the WCAB found no grounds to grant removal. Therefore, the petition was formally denied.

Order Denying RemovalPetition for RemovalWCJ ReportAMETreating PhysicianJavier GuzmanFedEx NationalCambridge SacramentoWorkers' Compensation Appeals Board
References
0
Showing 1-10 of 67 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational