W.C. No. 4-603-270.Industrial Claim Appeals Office.
February 11, 2010.
PROCEDURAL ORDER
This matter is before us pursuant to the Motion for Additional 60 Day extension to File Opening Brief filed by the respondents. We issue this order pursuant to § 8-43-301(9), C.R.S. 2009, which grants us power to “issue such procedural orders as may be necessary to carry out” our appellate review.
In this motion, we are advised by the respondents that a full and final settlement has been reached, but the parties are awaiting an order from the Division of Workers’ Compensation approving the settlement and dismissal of the case. The respondents request an additional 60 day extension to submit their opening brief or request that we hold the matter in abeyance and refrain from issuing an order for 60 days.
We note that Administrative Law Judge Jones (ALJ) had previously, in an order dated November 16, 2009, granted a 60-day extension for the opening brief. Pursuant to the ALJ’s order the respondents’ brief was due on or before December 25, 2009. The respondents did not file their opening brief and the motion for additional 60 day extension is dated February 3, 2010 and was received by us on February 4, 2010. Therefore, the respondents’ motion was filed long after the original extension of time had expired.
We further note that the respondents’ motion lists the W.C. Number as 4-603-790 and the insurer as Pacific Employers Insurance Company, both of which are at variance with the order under appeal hear. These may merely be clerical errors.
Page 2
It is provided in § 8-43-301(11), C.R.S. 2009 that we must act within sixty days of the receipt of the certified record or the order of the ALJ shall be deemed the order of the Panel. Thus we may not simply hold the matter in abeyance. Nevertheless, it is provided in § 8-43-301(9) that we have the power, where the parties file a stipulated motion requesting that consideration of the appeal be deferred pending ongoing settlement negotiation to extend the time for entry of our order up to a maximum of thirty days. However, the motion before us has not been stipulated to by the claimant, nor is it clear because of possible clerical errors in the order that the present motion relates to the appeal presently before us.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the respondents’ Motion for Additional 60 Day Extension is denied. The parties may file a joint motion under § 8-43-301(9) for our consideration given the time constraints imposed by § 8-43-301(11).
INDUSTRIAL CLAIM APPEALS PANEL
____________________________________ John D. Baird
____________________________________ Thomas Schrant
CHRISTINA M. MARTINEZ, ENGLEWOOD, CO, (Claimant).
WENDY’S INC., Attn: DIANE PACHECO, AURORA, CO, (Employer).
ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Attn: ANITA FRESQUEZ-MONTOYA, C/O: ESIS/ACE USA, PORTLAND, OR, (Insurer).
BENDINELLI LAW OFFICE, Attn: JERRY SUMNER, ESQ./MARC BENDINELLI, ESQ., DENVER, CO, (For Claimant).
TREECE, ALFREY, MUSAT BOSWORTH, PC, Attn: JAMES B. FAIRBANKS, ESQ., DENVER, CO, (For Respondents).
Page 1