Court Opinion

ID: 9364932
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-20 18:00:37.196891+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:41.424062
License: Public Domain

NOT FOR PUBLICATION                        FILED
                    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                        JAN 20 2023
                                                                      MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
                                                                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
                              FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALLEN B. FLORES,                                 No. 21-71275

                Petitioner,                      BRB No. 21-0356

 v.
                                                 MEMORANDUM*
PACIFIC CRANE MAINTENANCE
COMPANY; DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF
WORKERS' COMPENSATION
PROGRAMS,

                Respondents.

                     On Petition for Review of an Order of the
                              Benefits Review Board

                              Submitted January 18, 2023**
                                San Francisco, California

Before: HAWKINS, S.R. THOMAS, and McKEOWN, Circuit Judges.

      Allen B. Flores seeks review of the Benefit Review Board’s (BRB) order

affirming an Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) decision to refrain from

      *
             This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
      **
             The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
considering Flores’s request for modification of the ALJ’s separate order denying

Flores’s claim for benefits. The ALJ suspended action on Flores’s motion for

modification while his appeal was pending before us. The BRB explained that

“the OALJ will address Claimant’s motion for modification once the Ninth Circuit

issues a decision on Claimant’s appeal.” In light of our denial of Flores’s claim for

benefits, the case returns to the OALJ and this related action is now moot.

      PETITION DISMISSED.1

      1
            Pacific Crane Maintenance Company’s opposed motion requesting
permission to file an objection (Docket Entry No. 15) is denied.

                                         2