What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration granted; Finding of Fact #4 amended to find no apportionment to the right knee; permanent disability increased to 42%; attorney fee awarded
Petition for Reconsideration granted by the Appeals Board after review of the WCJ's Joint Findings and Award
What was disputed, and how it came out
Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.
ApportionmentApplicant prevailedright knee
Dr. Doty's opinion of a minimum 25% nonindustrial apportionment was unsubstantiated and did not meet the substantial medical evidence standard, so the Board found no apportionment to the right knee and increased permanent disability to 42%.
From the decision · page 5Here, the sole contention of the Petition for Reconsideration is that the evidence does not justify the finding of apportionment to degenerative changes in the right knee in case number ADJ10836901. While Dr. Doty does provide an opinion regarding cause of permanent disability of the right knee, he states only that he would apportion "a minimum of" 25 percent of current impairment to "the effects of all nonindustrial activity contributing to the early arthritis first evident on her initial x-rays and MRIs prior to her arthroscopic surgery." (Joint I, Report of Orthopedic PQME Dr. Doty dated July 7, 2020, page 4, paragraph 4.) He does not explain how and why "all nonindustrial activity" and "early arthritis" are causing approximately 25 percent of present disability. This does not meet the standards for substantial medical evidence of apportionment explained in Escobedo v. Marshalls (2005) 70 Cal.Comp.Cases 604 (Appeals Board en banc):