What the panel ordered
Petition for Reconsideration is dismissed as skeletal and because applicant is not aggrieved.
Applicant filed a Petition for Reconsideration, which was reviewed for sufficiency and aggrievement.
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 was skeletal, failed to state grounds or cite the record, and applicant was not aggrieved.
From the decision · page 4(1980) 45 Cal.Comp.Cases 564 (writ den.)); if it fails to fairly state all of the material evidence, including that not favorable to it (e.g., Addecco Employment Services v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Rios) (2005) 70 Cal.Comp.Cases 1331 (writ den.); City of Torrance v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (Moore) (2002) 67 Cal.Comp.Cases 948 (writ den.); or if it fails to specifically discuss the particular portion(s) of the record that support the petitioner's contentions (e.g., Moore, supra, 67 Cal.Comp.Cases at p. 948; Shelton v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1995) 60 Cal.Comp.Cases 70 (writ den.).) The petition filed herein fails to state grounds upon which reconsideration is sought or to cite with specificity to the record. Therefore, it is subject to dismissal. Moreover, we have reviewed the record in this matter and are persuaded that applicant is not aggrieved. If we were to address the merits, we would affirm the WCJ's February 16, 2024 Findings, Award and Order for the reason stated in the Joint Opinion on Decision.