Salinas district office

Released decisions heard here

Newest released decisions whose case card names this venue. Each quotes the passage it turned on and links to the official PDF. Litigated tail — not a win rate for this office.

• ADJ12852505 · 2026-06-25 · Salinas District OfficeReconsideration / removaldefendant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant has filed a petition for removal from the order taking the matter off calendar issued on January 12, 2026, by the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ).

  The Appeals Board agreed with the WCJ's analysis that the petitioner did not show substantial prejudice or irreparable harm if removal was denied, nor that reconsideration would be inadequate, and that good cause to bifurcate the issue was not presented.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ11748300 · 2026-05-22 · Salinas District OfficeReconsideration / removaldefendant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant SIBTF seeks disqualification of the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) based upon the allegation that the workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) previously served as defense counsel in this matter.

  The petition was dismissed as moot because the WCJ recused herself and the matter was reassigned.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ11850265 · 2026-04-28 · Salinas District OfficePermanent disability ratingapplicant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.3Defendant has filed a timely, verified Petition for Reconsideration from the Findings & Award of 11/09/2021, listing the usual statutory grounds. The issue is whether QME Dr. Stone's opinion, that the neck and upper extremity impairments should be combined with the lower extremity impairments by simple addition, qualifies as substantial medical evidence. I found that Dr. Stone's opinion in this regard did so qualify. The Petition for Reconsideration is without merit and should be denied.

  Dr. Stone's opinion that the neck and upper extremity impairments should be combined with the lower extremity impairments by simple addition rather than the Combined Values Chart (CVC) is supported as substantial evidence, leading to a 59% permanent disability rating rather than 51%.

  Official decision · page 3 →
• ADJ9758394 · 2026-02-13 · Salinas District OfficeReconsideration / removalremanded

  Determinative passage · p.1It has come to the attention of the Appeals Board that, while this matter has been pending on reconsideration1, the parties have reached a proposed settlement.

  The Appeals Board rescinded the prior decision and returned the matter to the trial level to allow the WCJ to consider the proposed settlement while the matter was pending on reconsideration.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ11035143 · 2026-01-27 · Salinas District OfficeStatute of limitationsdefendant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Applicant seeks reconsideration of the March 3, 2022 Order Rescinding Findings of Fact, Award, Orders and Opinion on Decision and Amended Findings of Fact, Award, Orders and Opinion on Decision (F&A), wherein the presiding workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) found that in Case No. ADJ7555655,1 applicant while employed as a Correctional Officer during the cumulative injury period ending November 23, 2010, sustained industrial injury to his bilateral knees and in the form of coronary artery disease, hypertensive cardiovascular disease, and tinnitus. The WCJ further found in Case No. ADJ11035143 that applicant, while employed as a Correctional Officer during the period ending December 29, 2012, sustained cumulative injury in the form of coronary artery disease and hypertensive cardiovascular disease. The WCJ found in relevant part that the claim for death benefits in ADJ11035143 was untimely because it was filed more than 240 weeks from the date of injury.

  The WCJ found the date of injury under section 5412 was December 29, 2012, and that the claim for death benefits filed on August 21, 2017 was untimely because it was filed more than 240 weeks from the date of injury, consistent with section 5406(b). The Board affirmed this finding, rejecting the applicant's argument that the date of injury was May 15, 2015.

  Official decision · page 1 →
• ADJ18755702 · 2025-08-04 · Salinas District OfficeReconsideration / removaldefendant prevailed

  Determinative passage · p.1Defendant seeks reconsideration of the Findings of Fact and Order issued by the workers compensation administrative law judge (WCJ) on May 14, 2025, wherein the WCJ found that development of the existing record was required in this matter.

  The WCJ found record development was required; the WCAB panel applied the removal standard for interlocutory issues and found no significant prejudice or irreparable harm to petitioner; reconsideration was deemed an adequate remedy; thus, the petition was denied.

  Official decision · page 1 →