What the panel ordered
The Petition for Reconsideration is granted, the Order Dismissing Case is rescinded as void ab initio, and the matter is returned to the WCJ for further proceedings.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of the Order Dismissing Case issued by the WCJ on February 23, 2024, which dismissed the case without prejudice for lack of prosecution.
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.
The WCJ improperly issued a Notice of Intention to Dismiss after the case was activated for hearing, making the dismissal order void ab initio.
From the decision · page 3Here, the WCJ's February 23, 2024, Order Dismissing Case is a final Order. The WCJ may issue a Notice of Intention (NIT) for any proper purpose. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10832 (a).) A proper purpose includes, but is not limited to, (1) Allowing, disallowing or dismissing a lien; (2) Granting, denying or dismissing a petition; (3) Sanctioning a party; (4) Submitting the matter on the record; or (5) Dismissing an application. (Id.) Pursuant to WCAB Rule 10832 (c), if an objection is filed within the time provided, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, in its discretion may: (1) Sustain the objection; (2) Issue an order consistent with the notice of intention together with an opinion on decision; or set the matter for hearing. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10832 (c).) Unless a case is activated for hearing within one year after filing of the Application for Adjudication of Claim or the entry of an order taking off calendar, the case may be dismissed after notice and opportunity to be heard. Such dismissals may be entered at the request of an interested party or upon the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board's own motion for lack of prosecution. (Cal. Code Regs. tit.