This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers' Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing was held on August 10, 2004. The hearing officer determined that the ______________, compensable injury of appellant (claimant) does not extend to include lumbar radiculopathy or an annular tear at L4-5. Claimant appealed this determination on sufficiency grounds. Respondent (carrier) responded that the hearing officer did not err in making her determinations.

DECISION

We affirm.

We have reviewed the complained-of determination regarding extent of injury and conclude that the issue involved a fact question for the hearing officer. The hearing officer reviewed the record and decided what facts were established. We conclude that the hearing officer’s determination is supported by the record and is not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986). We also conclude that there was no legal error regarding the weight given to the medical evidence in this case.

We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.

According to information provided by carrier, the true corporate name of the insurance carrier AMERICAN CASUALTY COMPANY OF READING, PENNSYLVANIA is and the name and address of its registered agent for service of process is

CT CORPORATION SYSTEM

350 NORTH ST. PAUL STREET, SUITE 2900

DALLAS, TEXAS 75201.

Judy L. S. Barnes

CONCUR:

Daniel R. Barry
Appeals Judge

Edward Vilano
Appeals Judge