James A. Wynn Jr.
How Judge Wynn rules, drawn from 84 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Wynn
James Andrew Wynn, Jr. is a judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Appointed by President Barack Obama, Judge Wynn received a commission on August 10, 2010.
Judge Wynn's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Wynn's own (checked October 11, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 11, 2026).
How Judge Wynn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In a suit over a tenant's carbon monoxide death, he rejected the housing authority's argument that it could not know the risk before someone was harmed and reversed dismissal of the complaint.
“Taken to its logical conclusion, the Housing Authority’s argument would amount to a ‘one free death’ card.”
In Oliva's asylum appeal, he held that the agency drew too fine a distinction between the applicant's former gang membership and the threats stemming from the gang's rent demand.
“it was Oliva’s status as a former gang member that led MS-13 to demand rent in the first place and to assault him for failure to pay it.”
Procedural preferences
In Goodman's excessive-force appeal, he held that an unverified amended complaint did not erase the evidentiary value of earlier verified complaints at summary judgment.
“an amended complaint does not divest an earlier verified complaint of its evidentiary value as an affidavit at the summary judgment stage.”
In Garcia Cortes's removal appeal, he held that the immigration judge's failure to consider a central therapist's letter violated the required procedure, and remanded.
“the Immigration Judge here failed to consider the single most important piece of evidence Garcia Cortes offered at her hearing, he violated the procedure required by statute.”
In his concurrence in an appeal from a Federal Communications Commission decision, he rejected the agency's asserted ability to prevent judicial review by delaying or declining its own review.
“an agency may not reserve to itself the power to defeat judicial review through delay or inaction. That is too much power for an agency.”
Cautions
In Davis's postconviction appeal, he held that the federal arson offense at issue was not a crime of violence under § 924(c) because it could reach a defendant's own property, and reversed the denial of relief.
“By its terms, the force clause does not reach the use of physical force against property solely owned by the defendant.”
In a Medicare reimbursement appeal, he held that the Secretary's FAQ 33 set policy under delegated authority and required legislative rulemaking; the court affirmed an injunction against enforcing the FAQ.
“When an agency relies on expressly delegated authority to establish policy—as the Secretary does with regard to FAQ 33—courts generally treat the agency action as legislative, rather than interpretive, rulemaking.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“We hold that Plaintiffs’ successes properly supported the award of attorneys’ fees and costs and affirm the district court. Nos. 08-2370 and 09-1928 DISMISSED No. 09-2113 AFFIRMED”
“Accordingly, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
“For the reasons stated herein, the judgment of the district court is REVERSED AND REMANDED.”
“For reasons stated above, we affirm the judgment of the district court. AFFIRMED”
“For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the judgment of the district court enjoining the Secretary from enforcing the policy set forth in FAQ 33 against Children’s Hospital, and vacate the district court’s opinion to the extent it concludes that that policy conflicts with the language of Section 1396r-4(g), but without prejudice to Children’s Hospital’s right to raise that argument in another proceeding. AFFIRMED IN PART AND VACATED IN PART”
“Because McFadden has failed to make a prima facie showing that his application meets the requirements of Section 2244(b), we deny his motion to file a successive habeas application. MOTION DENIED”
“For the reasons discussed above, we affirm the judgment of the district court. AFFIRMED”
“For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.”
“We therefore vacate Defendant's sentence and remand for the district court to determine Defendant's proper tier classification (i.e., I or II), calculate the corresponding Sentencing Guidelines range, and impose a sentence. VACATED AND REMANDED”
“For the foregoing reasons, we reverse the district court's denial of Davis's § 2255 motion. We remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. REVERSED AND REMANDED”
“We conclude that each of Taylor-Sanders's claims on appeal are barred by the appeal waiver in her guilty plea. Therefore, her appeal is DISMISSED.”
“And because Williams filed his motion more than three and a half years after the applicable district court order, the court correctly held that his motion was untimely filed. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the district court's denial of Williams's Rule 60(b)(3) motion. AFFIRMED”
Draft for Judge Wynn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Wynn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Wynn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace