David Allan Baker
How Judge Baker decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Social Security appeals he applies deferential substantial-evidence review and will affirm even where he might have weighed the record differently; he will not reweigh evidence or substitute his judgment for the ALJ's. The recurring losing argument is a request to re-decide the facts.
“Where the Commissioner's decision is supported by substantial evidence, the District Court will affirm, even if the reviewer would have reached a contrary result as finder of fact, and even if the reviewer finds that the evidence preponderates against the Commissioner's decision.”
Under the post-2017 regulations (20 C.F.R. 416.920c) the treating-physician rule is gone; medical opinions are judged on supportability and consistency, which are the two most important factors. An ALJ may permissibly discount even a treating source whose extreme limitations are unsupported by that source's own exam findings or by a limited treatment history.
“Supportability and consistency constitute the most important factors in any evaluation of a medical opinion, and the ALJ must explain the consideration of those two factors.”
A treating physician's bare conclusion that the claimant cannot work carries no weight under the regulations, and the ALJ need not analyze it; in Salata he upheld discounting a treating physician seen only three times whose opinion was inconsistent with her own exam.
“The ALJ found Dr. Brouillette's opinion 'unpersuasive, since Dr. Brouillette appears to have a very limited history of treating the claimant, as Dr. Brouillette only saw the claimant three times.'”
Procedural preferences
He applies harmless-error analysis to RFC omissions: an ALJ's failure to include a particular limitation is not reversible where the vocational-expert jobs the claimant could still perform do not implicate that limitation.
“The ALJ's error, if any, in failing to include such environmental limitations in the RFC assessment thus would not change the ALJ's finding that Claimant could perform other work in the national economy.”
On unopposed routine case-management motions (e.g. extensions of time) he rules quickly by endorsed order -- the Butts extension was granted three days after filing.
“ENDORSED ORDER granting 6 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or respond. ... Signed by Magistrate Judge David A. Baker on 2/8/2016.”
Cautions
Do not ask him to re-weigh the administrative record in a Social Security appeal -- that is the argument he repeatedly rejects. Frame the appeal as a legal error (wrong standard, unexplained supportability/consistency analysis), not as a disagreement with the ALJ's factual findings.
“In short, Claimant essentially requests the Court to decide the facts anew, make credibility determinations, and reweigh the evidence, which the Court may not do.”
Motion outcomes
Counted from classified signed orders only. Percentages are shown only where the sample is large enough to be meaningful; smaller samples are reported as raw counts.
| Social security appeal N = 2 |
Denied: 2 | counts only |
A "1 of 1" is one ruling, not a tendency. Treat small samples as illustrative, not predictive.
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Because Claimant did not demonstrate reversible error by the ALJ, the final decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.”
“Because substantial evidence supports the decision of the ALJ, who applied the correct legal standards in this case, the Court affirms the Commissioner's final decision.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 189.5 days (N = 4).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 115 days (N = 3).
Recalled-MJ docket (docket 2022-2025) is dominated by criminal duty-magistrate matters: 6:**-mj-***** complaints and initial appearances (United States v. <defendant>), which terminate within days and are not merits motion rulings. The civil component is occasional 636(c)-consent overflow: Social Security appeals, removal/remand, and FLSA/consumer matters (2024 cohort assigned to him with Embry J. Kidd as referral magistrate). Historically (e.g. 2016, ERISA Butts v. Lincoln National) he took referral of routine pretrial motions on other judges' civil cases that mostly resolved at mediation.