The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has denied a petition for review from Marjan Apostolovski, who sought workers' compensation benefits after claiming psychological injuries from his employment with DynCorp International in Afghanistan. The court ruled that the evidence did not support his claim under the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA) as extended by the Defense Base Act (DBA). This decision affects Apostolovski and potentially sets a precedent for similar claims in the future.

Apostolovski, originally from North Macedonia, worked as a fuel distribution operator for DynCorp from 2010 to 2012 at Forward Operating Base Wolverine in Afghanistan. He alleged that he suffered from psychological injuries due to exposure to mortar and grenade attacks while on duty. He reported symptoms such as anxiety, difficulty sleeping, and weight loss, which he attributed to his experiences in Afghanistan. After returning to North Macedonia, he sought medical help and was diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

The dispute arose when Apostolovski filed a claim for benefits under the LHWCA in April 2020, asserting that his psychological injuries were work-related. The claim was initially denied by an administrative law judge (ALJ) who found that, despite the statutory presumption that his claim was valid, the evidence did not support a causal link between his employment and his psychological condition. The ALJ concluded that Apostolovski was not credible in his testimony and that the medical evidence did not substantiate his claims.

Apostolovski's appeal to the Benefits Review Board was also denied, leading him to seek further review from the Second Circuit. The court's review focused on whether the Board made any legal errors and whether the ALJ's findings were supported by substantial evidence. The court affirmed the Board's decision, stating, "the ALJ permissibly exercised his discretion in weighing the medical opinions of record, and his credibility determinations are rational and supported by substantial evidence."

The court found that the ALJ had properly concluded that DynCorp had rebutted the statutory presumption that Apostolovski's psychological injuries were work-related. The ALJ relied heavily on the opinion of Dr. Melissa Ogden, a psychologist who evaluated Apostolovski and determined that he did not have any psychological injuries caused by his employment. The ALJ noted that Dr. Ogden's opinion was supported by substantial evidence, stating that "there is no indication he is (or was) experiencing a psychological condition."

The court also addressed Apostolovski's claims regarding the credibility of his testimony and the weight given to his medical records. The ALJ had found discrepancies in Apostolovski's statements and determined that his treatment records were not well-documented or reliable. The ALJ concluded that Apostolovski's symptoms were likely due to factors unrelated to his employment with DynCorp.

This ruling has implications for future claims under the LHWCA and DBA, particularly for individuals seeking compensation for psychological injuries. The decision reinforces the importance of credible evidence and thorough medical evaluations in establishing a causal connection between employment and claimed injuries. It also highlights the challenges faced by claimants in proving psychological conditions, especially when there are inconsistencies in their testimony or medical records.

Moving forward, Apostolovski has limited options for appeal, as the court's decision is typically considered final in these cases. However, he may seek further legal advice to explore any potential avenues for challenging the ruling or filing new claims if new evidence arises. The case serves as a reminder of the complexities involved in workers' compensation claims, particularly those related to mental health.