Beverly Stites Jones
How Judge Jones decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Procedural preferences
On Social Security appeals where the claimant won a sentence-four remand, she treats the claimant as a prevailing party under Shalala v. Schaefer and recommends awarding the requested EAJA fees in full when the Commissioner does not object and the hours/rate are reasonable (capped at the $125/hr statutory rate).
“a social security claimant who obtains a sentence-four judgment reversing the Commissioner's denial of benefits and remanding the case for further proceedings is a prevailing party.”
Cautions
She screens in-forma-pauperis prisoner complaints under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e) and will recommend dismissal of complaints she finds frivolous or that fail to state a claim; bring a non-frivolous, well-pleaded claim.
“plaintiff's complaint is dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous and fails to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).”
She gives the standard 10-day window for specific written objections and warns that only timely, specific objections trigger de novo district-court review; vague or late objections waive appeal of fact questions.
“The parties are reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“The report and recommendation is proper and should be and hereby is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendants' motion for summary judgment (Doc. 19) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
“we recommend awarding plaintiff's attorney fees and costs under EAJA in the amount of $1,399.51. This amount should be paid in addition to, and not out of, any past-due benefits which plaintiff may be awarded in the future.”
“we recommend awarding plaintiff's attorney fees and costs under EAJA in the amount of $4,212.45. This amount should be paid in addition to, and not out of, any past-due benefits which plaintiff may be awarded in the future.”
Jones's R&R, filed October 4, 2005, recommended sua sponte dismissal of the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). District Judge Hendren reviewed the recommendation de novo, overruled the plaintiff's objections, and adopted it in its entirety 57 days later.
Jones's R&R, filed November 16, 2005, recommended sua sponte dismissal for failure to prosecute or obey a court order under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). District Judge Dawson adopted it without objections 22 days later.
Jones's R&R, filed July 25, 2005, recommended sua sponte dismissal of the complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B). District Judge Hendren adopted it without objections 39 days later.
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed work centers on consent Social Security appeals, prisoner civil-rights and habeas recommendations, attorney-fee requests, discovery disputes, and case management. It is a descriptive selection of available matters, not a complete caseload census.
Put Judge Jones's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Jones actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Jones's own signed orders and cites them.