Sean P. Flynn
How Judge Flynn rules, drawn from 6 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Flynn decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Medical-opinion articulation is the live battleground in his Social Security docket: under the post-2017 regulations he requires the ALJ to explicitly articulate the supportability and consistency of every medical source, and he will remand when an ALJ rejects a longitudinal treating-source opinion in conclusory terms or never addresses supportability: a well-developed articulation challenge is the kind that wins a remand from him.
“because the ALJ failed to adequately address the supportability and consistency factors in evaluating the opinion of Dr. Nichols, the Court finds that the ALJ's decision is not supported by substantial evidence.”
Against the deferential substantial-evidence standard he will not be moved by record-reweighing arguments: pointing to other evidence that could support a different RFC, or to the mere existence of an impairment, does not carry the claimant's burden, and step-four error is forgiven where a correct alternative step-five finding identifies available jobs.
“To the extent that [the claimant] points to other evidence which would undermine the ALJ's RFC determination, her contentions misinterpret the narrowly circumscribed nature of our appellate review, which precludes us from re-weighing the evidence or substituting our judgment for that of the Commissioner.”
A medical opinion stated only in general or qualitative terms may receive less weight when it does not translate the claimant's condition into specific work-related functional limits.
“It is appropriate to assign less weight to medical opinions that are vague and fail to provide a function-by-function assessment of the claimant’s ability to perform work related activity.”
He does not require a physician's opinion to mirror the residual functional capacity and will reject a record-development challenge that identifies no concrete evidentiary gap or prejudice; speculation that another examination might produce stricter limits is insufficient.
“There is no requirement . . . that there be medical opinion evidence from a physician that matches the RFC determination.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“As the Administrative Law Judge's ('ALJ') decision was based on substantial evidence and employed proper legal standards, the Commissioner's decision is affirmed.”
“After reviewing the administrative record and the parties' arguments, the undersigned finds that the Administrative Law Judge's ('ALJ') decision is supported by substantial evidence. ... 1. The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.”
“Based on a review of the record, the briefs, and the applicable law, the Commissioner's decision is REVERSED and REMANDED under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g).”
“OPINION AND ORDER. The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed. The Clerk is directed to enter final judgment in favor of the Defendant and close the case.”
“Plaintiff’s Unopposed Petition for Attorney’s Fees (Doc. 25) is GRANTED.”
“The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The reviewed matters provide descriptive caseload context rather than a complete census. No authoritative case-disposition baseline was available for the period.
Draft for Judge Flynn with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Flynn, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Flynn's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace