Frederick R. Buckles
Judge Buckles no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Buckles decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A step-two finding that an impairment is non-severe draws a reversal when the ALJ leans on stale, pre-hearing medical evidence and ignores a later-diagnosed recurrence of the same condition, especially where the ALJ never ordered updated testing to resolve the gap.
“[T]o rely on a January 2007 work release statement to find plaintiff's carpal tunnel syndrome not to be severe in May 2011 was error.”
Where the ALJ's opinion walks through the regulatory factors and gives specific, articulated reasons for declining to give a treating physician's opinion controlling weight, that determination is affirmed even where the claimant argues the source should have been credited.
“[T]he ALJ acknowledged Dr. Hoja's status, cited the Regulations mandating the treatment to be afforded evidence from treating sources, and fully explained his reasons for declining to give Dr. Hoja's opinion controlling weight. The undersigned therefore concludes that substantial evidence supports the ALJ's decision.”
Procedural preferences
Where the Commissioner's own brief concedes that further administrative consideration is warranted and moves to reverse and remand, the motion is granted efficiently, without extended analysis.
“A review of defendant's motion shows it to be well-taken.”
A separate state-agency disability determination (for example, Missouri's public-assistance eligibility finding) carries no binding weight on the Commissioner's own decision and will not by itself support reversal.
“[A] determination made by any non-governmental or any other governmental agency that a claimant is disabled is based on its own rules, and is not binding on the Commissioner.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g), the decision of the Commissioner is REVERSED, and this cause is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Because the current record does not conclusively demonstrate that plaintiff is entitled to benefits, it would be inappropriate for the Court to award plaintiff such benefits at this time.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed, and Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed with prejudice.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion To Reverse And Remand (Docket No. 22) is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision is reversed and this cause is remanded to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
The analyzed sample focuses on Social Security appeals. Buckles's docket also included referred pretrial matters, habeas corpus petitions, prisoner civil-rights cases, forfeiture and miscellaneous proceedings, and general consent civil matters typical of a long-serving magistrate judge's referred-and-consent docket. Many of those cases resolve by dismissal, referral, or settlement without a written dispositive-motion ruling, and the broader docket was not surveyed exhaustively.
A historical record
Judge Buckles no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.