Jorge Xol vs. Bo Tech Maintenance

1 BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H405369 JORGE TENI XOL, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT BO TECH MAINTENANCE, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT TECHNOLOGY INS. CO./ AMTRUST NORTH AMERICA, CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE FILED JULY 28, 2025 Hearing conducted on Thursday, July 24, 2025, before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission (the Commission), Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Mike Pickens, in Texarkana, Miller County, Arkansas. The claimant, Mr. Jorge Teni Xol, pro se, of Texarkana, Bowie County, Texas, failed and/or refused to appear at the hearing. The respondent was represented by the Honorable William C. (Bill) Frye, North Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. STATEMENT OF THE CASE A hearing was conducted on Thursday, July 24, 2025, to determine whether this claim should be dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis Replacement) and Commission Rule 099.13 (2025 Lexis Replacement). On March 6, 2025, the respondents filed a letter motion to dismiss without prejudice for failure to prosecute (MTD) with the Commission. (Respondents’ Exhibit 1). In compliance with the applicable law the claimant was provided due and legal notice of the respondents’ MTD as well as the date, time, and location of the subject hearing, which he received on April 14, 2025.

Jorge Teni Xol, AWCC No. H405369 2 (Commission Exhibit 1). The claimant did not respond to the respondents’ motion in any way, and he failed and/or refused to appear at the subject hearing. The claimant sustained an admittedly compensable injury to his finger for which the respondents paid both medical and indemnity benefits. The respondents last paid indemnity benefits in this claim on or about November 27, 2024, and last paid medical benefits for physical therapy (PT) treatment through the date the claimant’s physical therapist released him from PT treatment on December 4, 2024. (Hearing Transcript; Respondents’ Exhibit 2). There exists no evidence the claimant has required, sought, or received any additional medical treatment after December 4, 2024. The record herein consists of the hearing transcript and any and all exhibits contained therein and attached thereto. DISCUSSION Consistent with Ark. Code Ann.§ 11-9-702(a)(4) (2025 Lexis Repl.), as well as our court of appeals’ ruling in Dillard vs. Benton County Sheriff’s Office, 87 Ark. App. 379, 192 S.W.3d 287 (Ark. App. 2004), the Commission scheduled and conducted a hearing on the respondents’ MTD. Rather than recite a detailed analysis of the record, suffice it to say the preponderance of the evidence introduced at the hearing and contained in the record conclusively reveals the claimant has failed and/or refused to either request a hearing within the last six (6) months, and he has taken no steps whatsoever to prosecute this claim. Therefore, after a thorough consideration of the facts, issues, the applicable law, the representations of credible counsel, and other relevant matters of record, I hereby make the following:

Jorge Teni Xol, AWCC No. H405369 3 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Commission has jurisdiction of this claim. 2. After having been mailed due and legal notice of the respondents’ letter MTD without prejudice filed with the Commission on April 10, 2025, as well as notice of the date, time, and place of the subject hearing, the claimant failed and/or refused to respond in any way to the respondents’ MTD, and he failed and/or refused to appear at the hearing. Therefore, the claimant is deemed to have waived his right to a hearing on the respondents’ MTD. 3. The claimant has not requested a hearing within the last six (6) months, and he has failed and/or refused to prosecute this claim. 4. The respondents’ letter MTD without prejudice filed April 10, 2025, should be and hereby is GRANTED; and this claim is dismissed without prejudice to its refiling pursuant to the deadlines prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. Section 11-9-702(a) and (b), and Commission Rule 099.13. This opinion shall not be construed to prohibit the claimant, his attorney, any attorney he may retain in the future, or anyone acting legally and on his behalf from refiling the claim if it is refiled within the applicable time periods prescribed by Ark. Code Ann. § 11-9-702(a) and (b). If they have not already done so, the respondents hereby are ordered to pay the court reporter’s invoice within twenty (20) days of their receipt thereof. IT IS SO ORDERED. ____________________________ Mike Pickens Administrative Law Judge MP/mp

Jorge Teni Xol, AWCC No. H405369 4