On July 8, 2010, applicant Gustavo Lopez, 54, a construction worker for Best Demolition and Recycling, was in the course and scope of his employment in Los Angeles County when he fell 20 feet from a roof. He lost consciousness when he struck the floor. Lopez filed a workers’ compensation claim against his employer, Best Demolition and Recycling, and the workers’ compensation carrier, State Compensation Insurance Fund. Lopez brought the claim against the companies in an attempt to collect workers’ compensation benefits., Lopez sustained a traumatic brain injury and other polytrauma, including six fractured ribs, scapular and clavicular fractures, and ruptured blood vessels in his stomach. Upon arriving at the emergency room, scans showed that Lopez was bleeding from his spleen, had a left pneumothorax, and had sustained a left frontal subarachnoid hemorrhage. He was also in respiratory failure. After undergoing life-saving procedures, Lopez underwent reduction and internal fixation of his clavicle fracture. He also underwent a full splenectomy. Lopez was then intubated and remained in the hospital for over two weeks. Lopez’s treating physicians diagnosed him with a closed head injury with a loss of hearing in the right ear; a left distal clavicle fracture, a cervical strain without radiculopathy, possible fractures of the cervical and thoracic spine, multiple rib fractures on the left side, a lumbosacral strain, vestibular dysfunction, post-traumatic vision syndrome, impaired balance, depression, and neurogenic erectile dysfunction. Lopez also claimed that he suffers from executive dysfunction, headaches, cognitive impairment, passive suicidal ideations, tinnitus, impaired speed of information processing, loss of libido, and insomnia. His treating physicians also opined that Lopez would require periodic use of antidepressant medications, Parkinson-type medications for behavior management, stimulants for affect and mood control, antiepileptic drugs for pain control, and oral and injectable diabetic medications, amongst other medications. Lopez’s counsel contended that, in addition to his , Lopez’s pre-existing diabetes was exacerbated by the traumatic brain injury that Lopez sustained in the fall. Thus, counsel asserted that Lopez was entitling to life-long medical care for his diabetes, in addition to his other diagnoses. The applicant’s vocational rehabilitation expert evaluated Lopez and opined that Lopez’s earning capacity and work-life expectancy have been significantly impacted. The expert also opined that Lopez should be considered permanently and totally disabled, and unable to compete in the open labor market. Prior to Lopez’s counsel being substituting into the matter, prior counsel made a demand for settlement of $75,000. However, when Lopez’s new counsel took over, additional discovery and litigation commenced. The respondents’ counsel disputed the alleged industrial exacerbation of Lopez’s diabetes, and denied that Lopez was totally and permanently disabled.