NOT FOR PUB LIC ATION UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C U IT
JONES STEVEDOR

ING ) No. 16-70549 C OM PANY, ) ) B R B No. 2015-0182 Pe titione r, ) ) M EM OR

A NDUM * v. ) ) STEVEN POPOVIC H; DIREC TOR , ) OFFIC E OF W ORKER S’ ) C OM PENSATION PR OGR A M , )

) R e sponde nts. ) )

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B e ne fits R e vie w B oa

rd Subm itte d Nove m

be r 6, 2017 ** Portla nd, Ore gon B e fore : FER

NANDEZ a

nd W . FLETC HER , C i rc u it Judge s, a nd TIGAR , *** Distric t Judge
. 

# F IL ED
DEC 4 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a

ppropria te for public ation a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3.

** T he pa ne l una nim ously finds this c a se suita

ble for de c ision without ora l argum e nt. Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a )(2).

*** The Honora

ble Jon S. Tiga

r, Unite d State s Distric t Judge for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia , sitting by de signa tion.Jone s Ste v e doring C o m pa ny pe titions for re vie w of the de c ision of the Unite d State s De pa

rtm e nt of La

bor B e ne fits R e vie w B o ard (B R B ) whic h a ffirm e d the d e c ision of theAdm inistra tive La w Judge (ALJ) tha

t de nie d Jone s Ste v e d oring’ s a

pplic a tion for re lie f unde r 33 U.S.C . § 908(f) (c om m only and he re ina fte r re fe rre d to a s “ § 8(f) re lie f” 1 ). W e a ffirm
. Ste ve n Popovic h suffe re d a se ve re shoulde r injury

while working for Jone s Ste v e d oring, whic h, a s the B RB he ld, 2 re nde re d him pe rm ane ntly , tota l ly

disa ble d. Jone s Ste ve doring doe s not dispute the disa bility de te rm ination. W

hat it doe s
a sse rt, howe ve r, is tha

t the B RB e rre d whe n it de te rm ine d tha t Jone s Ste ve doring
wa s not e ntitle d to § 8(f) re lie f. W e disa g re e . W e have re vie we d the re c o rd and
are s a tisfie d tha

t the de c isions of the

ALJ a nd the B RB are supporte d by substa ntia l
e vide nc e an d do not be spe ak e rrors of la

w . Se e E.P. Paup C

o. v . Dir., Offic e of W ork e rs C omp. Programs, U.S. De

p’t of Labor , 999 F.2d 1341, 1347, 1352–54 (9th C ir. 1993); se e also Fe nsk ev . Se rv . Emps. Int’l, Inc

. , 835 F.3d 978, 980 (9th

1 Se e Longshore m e n’ s a

nd Ha rbor W o rke rs’ C om

pe nsation Ac t, c h. 509, § 8(f), 44 Sta

t. 1424, 1429 (1927).
2 The B RB “ is re quire d to ‘ a c c e pt the ALJ’ s findings unle ss the y are c ontra

ry to la w, irrationa l, or unsupporte d by substa ntia l e vide nc e . ’ ” Ste v e doring Se rv s. of Am. v

. Dir., Offic e of W

ork e rs’ C omp. Programs , 297 F.3d 797, 801 (9th C ir. 2002) (c ita

tion omitte d). 2C ir. 2016) (indic a ting tha t this c ourt owe s som e de fe re nc e to the position of the Dire c t or, Offic e of W orke rs’ C om pe nsation Progra

m s, a s pre se nte d in he r brie f be fore us); Pric ev . Ste v e doring Se r v s. of Am., Inc

. , 697 F.3d 820, 832 (9th C ir. 2012) (e n ba

nc ) (sam e ). He re , Jone s Ste ve d o ring did not show tha t Popovic h ’ s “ ‘ c urre nt disa bility is not due sole l y

to the m ost re c e nt injury
. ’ ” E.P. Paup , 999 F.2d a t 1352 (c ita

tion
om i tte d). Substa

ntia l e vide n c e supports the B R B ’ s de t e rm inat ion tha

t Popovic h’ s shoulde r injury

wa s suffic ie nt by

itse lf to re nde r him

tota lly , pe rm a

n e n tly disa ble d,
and, a t m ost, his other “ a ilm e nts [just] c re ate a gre ate r disa

bility tha n would” the shoulde r injury

a lone
. FMC C

o rp. v . Dir., Offic e of W

ork e rs C omp. Programs , 886 F.2d 1185, 1187 (9th C ir. 1989); se ealso E.P. Paup , 999 F.2d a t 1353. The
e vide nc e supports the

de t e rm i nation tha

t the shoulde r injury disa

b le d Popovic h from supporting him se lf if he sta rte d to fa l l, a

nd the da nge r of fa lling wa s e nde m ic to his job. Tha

t a lone m a de his disa

bility substa ntia l a nd pe rm ane nt, whilethe othe r injurie s m e re ly

inc re a se d the risk tha

t he would fa ll. Thus, Jone s Ste ve doring did not m e e t the § 8(f) sta nda rd. 3 AFFIR M ED.

3 W e do note tha

t Popovic h ha d som e de g e n e ra tive c ha nge s in his shoulde

r be fore this injury

took pla c e , a

nd those m ay

have c o ntribute d to the injury itse lf. Howe ve r, the y

we re not m anife st to Jone s Ste ve doring a t the tim e of the injury and, the re fore , do not he lp its c a se . Se e E.P. Paup , 999 F.2d a t 1352; Bunge

C orp. v . Dir., Offic e of W

ork e rs C omp. , 951 F.2d 1109, 1111 (9th C ir. 1991).

3