What the panel ordered
Applicant's petition for reconsideration dismissed as untimely; CIGA's petition for reconsideration granted; WCJ's November 26, 2025 Findings and Order rescinded; matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings
Petitions for reconsideration filed by applicant and defendant CIGA; applicant's petition dismissed as untimely; CIGA's petition granted; WCJ's November 26, 2025 Findings and Order rescinded; case returned to WCJ for further proceedings
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's finding of a September 28, 2014 date of injury under section 5412 was rejected because applicant lacked knowledge of the injury on that date; medical treatment was last provided on June 29, 2015, tolling the statute of limitations; thus, the claim was not barred and the matter was remanded for further proceedings.
From the decision · page 11Here, the WCJ determined applicant's claim was barred by the statute of limitations, ascribing a section 5412 date of injury of September 28, 2014, based upon an assumption that applicant gleaned the requisite disability and knowledge of his continuous trauma injury based upon the service of the AME Dr. Uppal's medical report of September 4, 2014 to his attorney, however, an applicant's knowledge cannot necessarily be presumed based solely upon written