Opinion
1
RIGOBERTO SANDOVAL, Applicant v. MACY'S, INC., permissibly self-insured, administered by SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES, Defendants No. ADJ8615215 Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California August 7, 2023Los Angeles District Office
OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION
CRAIG SNELLINGS, COMMISSIONER
Although still represented by an attorney of record, applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration in pro per on May 6, 2023. No dismissal or substitution of attorney has been filed. We have considered the allegations of the Petition for Reconsideration and the contents of the report of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) with respect thereto. Based on our review of the record, the petition is untimely and must be dismissed.
There are 30 days allowed within which to file a petition for reconsideration from a "final" decision that has been served by mail upon an address outside California. (Lab. Code, §§ 5900(a), 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605(a)(1).) This time limit is extended to the next business day if the last day for filing falls on a weekend or holiday. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10600.) To be timely, however, a petition for reconsideration must be filed with (i.e., received by) the WCAB within the time allowed; proof that the petition was mailed (posted) within that period is insufficient. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, §§ 10940(a), 10615(b).)
This time limit is jurisdictional and, therefore, the Appeals Board has no authority to consider or act upon an untimely petition for reconsideration. (Maranian v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1076 [65 Cal.Comp.Cases 650]; Rymer v. Hagler (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 1171, 1182; Scott v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1981) 122 Cal.App.3d 979,
2
984 [46 Cal.Comp.Cases 1008]; U.S. Pipe &Foundry Co. v. Industrial Acc. Com. (Hinojoza) (1962) 201 Cal.App.2d 545, 549 [27 Cal.Comp.Cases 73].)
In this case, the WCJ issued the Findings and Award on May 5, 2023. Based on the authority cited above, applicant had until Monday, June 5, 2023 to seek reconsideration in a timely manner. Therefore, the Petition for Reconsideration filed on June 6, 2023 is untimely and must be dismissed.
If the petition had been timely, we would have denied it on the merits for the reasons stated in the WCJ's report.
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS ORDERED that the Petition for Reconsideration is DISMISSED.
I CONCUR,
KATHERINE A. ZALEWSKI, CHAIR
ANNE SCHMITZ, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER