character. There is no competent, substantial record evidence establishing that Claimant believed he could not work; therefore, the JCC erred in awarding TTD benefits. Further, the JCC found that Claimant reached maximum medical improvement on July 1, 2002; therefore, it was error to determine that Claimant was entitled to TTD benefits following attainment of maximum medical improvement. Under the plain language of section 440.15(2)(a), TTD benefits cease when the employee reaches maximum medical improvement. We find, however, that because Claimant was working a reduced number of hours, he may be entitled to temporary partial disability (TPD) benefits for the period before reaching maximum medical improvement. See Fardella v. Genesis Health, Inc., 917 So.2d 276, 277 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (<HOLDING>). Therefore, we remand for factual findings
holding that once the division of workers compensation authorized rehabilitative training concomitant temporary total benefits up to 26 weeks were mandatory even though the claimant had reached mmi holding that the consideration of the fact that claimant collected unemployment benefits while he was allegedly disabled was not a ground for reversal where there was other medical and vocational evidence supporting denial of benefits and claimants receipt of unemployment benefits was not decisive factor in denial of benefits holding claimant was not entitled to agencys mistaken application of statutory provision holding that claimant moving for summary judgment on its claim must conclusively prove all the essential elements of the claim and that claimant has the burden to show that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that claimant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law holding that claimant was not entitled to tpd benefits after reaching mmi