Authorities as the decision cited them, with how this panel applied each one.
Lab. Code, 5904
Petitions for reconsideration of final decisions must be timely filed or are barred by Lab. Code, 5904.
The petition was timely filed within 30 days, including the 10-day extension for out-of-state service.
From the decision · page 3Finally, we note that the Petition was timely filed as the 20-day deadline for filing is
extended 10 calendar days from the date of service if the place of address and the place of mailing
of the party, attorney, or other agent of record being served is outside of California but within the
United States. (Lab. Code, § 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605.) The F&O issued and was
served on June 9, 2023; the Petition was filed on July 6, 2023, and included service on out of state
recipients in Kentucky. (Petition, pp. 23-24.) Therefore, the Petition was timely filed within 30
days. (Lab. Code, § 5903; Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10605.)
Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, 10955(a)
Removal is an extraordinary remedy granted only upon showing significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and that reconsideration is inadequate.
The petitioner failed to demonstrate significant prejudice or irreparable harm, and reconsideration was deemed adequate.
From the decision · page 2Removal is an extraordinary remedy rarely exercised by the Appeals Board. (Cortez v.
Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 596, 599, fn. 5 [71 Cal.Comp.Cases 155];
Kleemann v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 274, 280, fn. 2 [70
Cal.Comp.Cases 133].) The Appeals Board will grant removal only if the petitioner shows that
significant prejudice or irreparable harm will result if removal is not granted. (Cal. Code Regs.,
tit. 8, § 10955(a); see also Cortez, supra; Kleemann, supra.) Also, the petitioner must demonstrate
that reconsideration will not be an adequate remedy if a final decision adverse to the petitioner
ultimately issues. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10955(a).) Here, based upon the WCJ's analysis of
the merits of the petitioner's arguments, we are not persuaded that significant prejudice or
irreparable harm will result if removal is denied and/or that reconsideration will not be an adequate
remedy.
Lab. Code, 5813(a)
Sanctions for bad-faith actions or tactics are to be considered first by the WCJ under Lab. Code, 5813(a).
The WCAB declined to consider sanctions and referred the matter to the WCJ for initial consideration.
From the decision · page 2Additionally, applicant seeks sanctions, attorney's fees, and costs against defendant.
(Answer, pp. 7-10.) We will not consider applicant's request because it should be considered by
the WCJ in the first instance. Section 5813 authorizes the WCJ to impose sanctions, attorney's
fees, and costs for "bad-faith actions or tactics that are frivolous or solely intended to cause
unnecessary delay." (Lab. Code, § 5813(a).) The order of sanctions can be made "after written
application by the party seeking sanctions or upon the appeal board's own motion." (Lab. Code,
§ 5813(b).) In order for the WCJ to impose sanctions and costs, the alleged offending party or
attorney must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard. (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10421(a);
see also Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10832(a)(3).) Bad faith actions or tactics that are frivolous or
solely intended to cause unnecessary delay include actions or tactics that result from a willful
failure to comply with a statutory or regulatory obligation, that result from a willful intent to disrupt