What the panel ordered
Findings and Award of March 14, 2023, affirmed except issues of permanent disability and attorney fees deferred; Award amended and matter returned to WCJ for further proceedings; clerical error corrected.
Defendant sought reconsideration of the Findings and Award issued by the WCJ on March 14, 2023, challenging the permanent disability rating and Almaraz/Guzman analysis; the WCJ recommended denial of the Petition for Reconsideration; the WCAB affirmed the Findings and Award except it deferred permanent disability and attorney fee issues and returned the matter to the 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.
Dr. Wolfson's report did not constitute substantial evidence due to failure to perform the required four-step Almaraz/Guzman analysis; therefore, the permanent disability caused by the injury was deferred for further development.
From the decision · page 4and Category IV weakness in flexion strength using Almaraz/Guzman.... I am combining them [weakness and motion impairment] using the Almaraz/Guzman rule...." (Joint Exh. 2, p. 27.) Having reviewed his report, it is not clear what aspect of the Almaraz/Guzman analysis Dr. Wolfson was referring to, but it does not appear that he utilized the four-step analysis noted above. Absent that analysis, Dr. Wolfson's report does not constitute substantial evidence. (Milpitas Unified School Dist. v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd., supra.)