What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration dismissed as untimely.
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 petition for reconsideration was dismissed as untimely because it was filed 103 days after the service of the prior decision, exceeding the 25-day filing limit, and the Appeals Board lacked jurisdiction to consider it.
The facts that decided it
What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.
The petition for reconsideration was filed 103 days after the service of the March 14, 2019 decision.
Favours Defendant prevailed
This filing was beyond the 25-day statutory limit for filing a petition for reconsideration, rendering it untimely.
From the decision · page 4Assuming arguendo that we were not bound by the June 6, 2019 order by the Court of Appeal and were able to consider defendant's petition as one for reconsideration, it was filed 103 days after the service of our March 14, 2019 decision, and is therefore untimely.