What the panel ordered
Petition for reconsideration granted; final decision deferred pending further review.
Petition for reconsideration and/or removal granted; final decision deferred pending further review of merits and entire record.
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 WCAB granted reconsideration to allow further review of the merits and the entire record due to unresolved factual and legal issues regarding utilization review and medical necessity.
From the decision · page 10Although we have preliminarily considered the Petition for Reconsideration, the WCJ's Report, and the record in this matter, we are not persuaded that the record is properly developed on one or more of the above issues, including whether there was a timely made and timely communicated UR determination for each of Dr. Foxley's RFAs, and if not, how the MTUS applies to each specific request for treatment. Accordingly, taking into account the statutory time constraints for acting on the petitions, and based upon our initial review of the record, we believe reconsideration must be granted to allow sufficient opportunity to further study the factual and legal issues in this case. Thereafter, a final decision after reconsideration will be issued by the Appeals Board, from which any aggrieved person may timely seek a writ of review pursuant to Labor Code section 5950 et seq.