This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing (CCH) was held on May 22, 2002. The hearing officer resolved the disputed issues by deciding that the appellant’s (claimant) compensable injury does not extend to include temporal-mandibular joint (TMJ) dysfunction and that the first certification of maximum medical improvement and whole person impairment rating assigned by Dr. G on April 19, 2001, did not become final under Tex. W.C. Comm’n, 28 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 130.5(e) (Rule 130.5(e)). The claimant appeals the extent-of-injury determination. The respondent (carrier) responds, urging affirmance.
DECISION
Affirmed.
The parties stipulated that the claimant sustained a compensable injury to the right shoulder and cervical spine on _________________. Extent of injury is a factual question for the fact finder to resolve. The carrier presented evidence at the CCH from a dentist who, after examining the claimant, concluded in correspondence dated January 23, 2002, that his TMJ was normal. The hearing officer, as finder of fact, is the sole judge of the relevance and materiality of the evidence as well as the weight and credibility that is to be given to the evidence. Section 410.165(a). It is for the hearing officer to resolve the inconsistencies and conflicts in the evidence. Garza v. Commercial Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey, 508 S.W.2d 701 (Tex. Civ. App.-Amarillo 1974, no writ). The Appeals Panel will not disturb the challenged factual findings of a hearing officer unless they are so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, and we do not find them to be so in this case. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986); In re King’s Estate, 150 Tex. 662, 244 S.W.2d 660 (1951).
We affirm the decision and order of the hearing officer.
The true corporate name of the insurance carrier is EMPLOYERS INSURANCE OF WAUSAU and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is
C T CORPORATION SYSTEMS
350 NORTH ST. PAUL, SUITE 2900
DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.
Michael B. McShane – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Elaine M. Chaney – Appeals Judge
Susan M. Kelley – Appeals Judge