Kevin Keene, Applicant v. Epsilon Electronics; Peerless Indemnity Insurance Company, Defendants

Full title: KEVIN KEENE, Applicant v. EPSILON ELECTRONICS; PEERLESS INDEMNITY…

Court: California Workers Compensation Decisions

Date published: Jun 21, 2022

No. ADJ8855250 (Cal. W.C.A.B. Jun. 21, 2022)

Opinion

KEVIN KEENE, Applicant v. EPSILON ELECTRONICS; PEERLESS INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants No. ADJ8855250 California Workers Compensation Decisions Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board State of California June 21, 2022

Van Nuys District Office

OPINION AND ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

KATHERINE A. ZALEWSKI, CHAIR

Applicant seeks reconsideration of the April 5, 2022 Opinion and Order Dismissing Petition for Reconsideration. The Appeals Board dismissed applicant’s Petition for Reconsideration of a December 20, 2021 decision by a workers’ compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) because the decision was untimely.

Whether a petition is timely depends on when the petition was received by the district office rather than when the petition is mailed. 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, 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].)

If the Petition for Reconsideration of the December 20, 2021 decision had been filed timely, we would have denied it on the merits for the reasons stated in the WCJ in the Report and Recommendation on Petition for Reconsideration.

For the foregoing reasons,

IT IS ORDERED that applicant’s Petition for Reconsideration of the April 5, 2022 Order is DENIED.

I CONCUR, MARGUERITE SWEENEY, COMMISSIONER, KATHERINE WILLIAMS DODD, COMMISSIONER