What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration granted; December 27, 2024 Order of Dismissal rescinded; matter returned to trial level for further proceedings.
Applicant seeks reconsideration of the December 27, 2024 Order of Dismissal of Case, which dismissed the claim without prejudice due to lack of prosecution and failure to timely object to the Notice of Intent to Dismiss.
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 dismissal was premature and void because the Notice of Intent to Dismiss was issued before the one-year period after the last order taking off calendar had elapsed, and the applicant timely objected to the Notice of Intent to Dismiss.
From the decision · page 5Pursuant to the clear language of WCAB Rule 10550(a), a case may not be dismissed until the passage of "one year after an order taking off calendar." (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8, § 10550(a).) Given that the last order taking off calendar issued on August 21, 2024, the earliest applicant's case may be dismissed is August 21, 2025. Here, the WCJ issued the NIT on September 17, 2024. As such, the NIT is premature and void. The December 27, 2024 Order is therefore similarly premature and void as it was issued based upon the improper NIT.3