Robert B. Jones, Jr.
How Judge Jr. 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 affirms where the claimant cannot show actual prejudice from a procedural ruling — e.g. an ALJ's denial of a hearing continuance is not reversible absent a proffer of evidence that might have changed the result.
“To establish prejudice, a claimant must demonstrate that he or she could and would have adduced evidence that might have altered the result. ... Here, Claimant points to no evidentiary gaps that resulted in unfairness or prejudice to Claimant.”
On the much-litigated post-Pereira challenge to illegal-reentry indictments, he holds the immigration court's jurisdiction is governed by the regulations (8 C.F.R. 1003.14/1003.15), not by the NTA time-and-place requirement of 8 U.S.C. 1229(a)(1) — so a defective NTA does not void the underlying removal order.
“The Court finds that 8 C.F.R. 1003.14 and 1003.15 -not 8 U.S.C. 1229(a)(1) and Pereira's interpretation of that statutory provision-control when and how subject matter jurisdiction vests in an immigration court.”
Procedural preferences
He is entitled to presume that a represented claimant's counsel presented the strongest case and structured the record; he will not act as substitute counsel.
“an ALJ has the right to presume that claimant's counsel presented claimant's strongest case for benefits.”
Handles a high volume of consent (636(c)) Social Security appeals and consents-by-the-Commissioner sentence-four remands, often resolved quickly once the remand motion is filed.
“ORDER granting 21 Motion to Remand under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. 405(g). Signed by US Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. on 8/1/2022.”
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.
| Judgment on pleadings N = 2 |
Granted: 1Denied: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 1 |
Denied: 1 | 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.
“To establish prejudice, a claimant must demonstrate that he or she could and would have adduced evidence that might have altered the result. ... Here, Claimant points to no evidentiary gaps that resulted in unfairness or prejudice to Claimant.”
“the Claimants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [DE-25] is DENIED, Defendants Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [DE-27] is ALLOWED, and Defendants final decision is affirmed.”
“For the reasons stated below, it is recommended that Defendant's motion be denied. ... The Court finds that 8 C.F.R. 1003.14 and 1003.15 -not 8 U.S.C. 1229(a)(1) and Pereira's interpretation of that statutory provision-control when and how subject matter jurisdiction vests in an immigration court.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 243 days (N = 5).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 5 days (N = 1).