Robert T. Numbers, II
How Judge II 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 remands when the ALJ fails to give a claimant's VA disability rating 'substantial weight' (Bird v. Comm'r), especially where the ALJ discounts it in conclusory fashion.
“mindful of the joint purpose and evidentiary requirements for a disability finding by both the VA and the SSA, such a finding fails to properly consider the disability determination of another agency as required in light of the Bird decision.”
He reverses where an ALJ 'selectively extracted' part of a treating physician's opinion to discredit it; a well-supported, uncontradicted treating-source opinion is owed deference under the treating-physician factors.
“the ALJ selectively extracted part of Dr. Seavers' opinion as a basis to discredit it. ... Dr. Seavers' assessment appears well-supported and uncontradicted, and the ALJ's basis for affording it less weight cannot be given deference.”
Conversely, he affirms an ALJ's use of the Medical-Vocational Guidelines (Grids) at step five — without VE testimony — where the claimant's non-exertional limitations do not significantly erode the unskilled occupational base.
“Having concluded that the ALJ's use of the Grids was not impermissible inasmuch as the non-exertional limitations did not significantly erode the occupational base, and also finding that testimony from a VE was not required at step five, Chavis's arguments to the contrary are without merit and are rejected.”
Procedural preferences
Gives pro se pleadings a liberal construction and substantial leeway (e.g., a final chance to perfect service rather than dismissal).
“pleadings by pro se parties are not held to the same exacting standard as those that apply to represented parties. Courts must give pleadings by pro se parties a liberal construction, considering their lack of formal legal training.”
Will not rubber-stamp an unopposed summary-judgment motion; he reaches the merits even when the non-movant files no response.
“the court does not automatically grant an uncontested motion for summary judgment. ... Instead, the court must still determine whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Develop your arguments: perfunctory, undeveloped arguments are waived, even (especially) for represented parties.
“'it is not the obligation of this court to research and construct legal arguments open to parties, especially when they are represented by counsel,' and 'perfunctory and undeveloped arguments . . . are waived.'”
Cautions
Read the court's orders in full. The conduct that ultimately drew Rule 11 sanctions traced to an attorney who repeatedly admitted she had not read his orders all the way through.
“The Court assumes that Calloway-Durham failed to read it in its entirety too.”
Do not misrepresent authority or label a colorable claim 'frivolous' to manufacture a jurisdictional defect — he checks the cited cases.
“This argument misrepresents the holding in Brown.”
Do not file a meritless, dilatory motion. An eve-of-trial motion to dismiss with no chance of success, filed to delay, drew Rule 11(b)(1)/(b)(2) sanctions against counsel and joint liability for her government employer.
“By filing that motion, Calloway-Durham violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ... These arguments lacked any chance of success, and a reasonable attorney would have recognized that shortcoming. The Court further concludes that she filed the motion to unnecessarily delay trial.”
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 = 4 |
Granted: 2Denied: 2 | counts only |
| Summary judgment N = 3 |
Granted: 2Granted in part: 1 | counts only |
| Motions to dismiss N = 2 |
Granted: 1Granted in part: 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.
“it is ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [D.E. 23] is GRANTED, that the Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [D.E. 26] is DENIED and that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings.”
“the Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings [D.E. 26] is DENIED and that the matter is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings.”
“Chavis's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (D.E. 30) is denied, Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (D.E. 32) is granted, and Commissioner's decision is affirmed.”
“Defendant's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (D.E. 32) is granted, and Commissioner's decision is affirmed.”
“For the foregoing reasons, State Farm's Motion to Dismiss is granted.”
“State Farm's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted and the Huangs' claims for negligent misrepresentation and unfair and deceptive trade practices are dismissed.”
“the undersigned recommends that the District Court dismiss the Rocky Mount Community Corrections Judicial Center Probation Department and Johnson and Parris in their official capacities from this case. The rest of the motion should be denied.”
“Craft is entitled to summary judgment on all of Mayo's claims.”
“But the Probation Defendants are only entitled to summary judgment on some of Mayo's claims.”
43-page sua sponte Rule 11 SANCTIONS order (not a ruling on a party motion; excluded from motion stats). After a show-cause process, Numbers found that an N.C. Department of Justice (Public Safety Section) attorney, Sonya Calloway-Durham, violated Rule 11(b)(1) and (b)(2) by filing an eve-of-trial third motion to dismiss with no chance of success and to delay trial, and held NCDOJ jointly liable under Rule 11(c)(1). Sanctions imposed: formal admonishment of attorney and NCDOJ; for one year all of the attorney's federal filings must be co-signed by someone attesting Rule 11 compliance; referral to the N.C. State Bar for investigation of a potential disability; and the Attorney General must prepare a report on steps to fix the Public Safety Section's deficiencies. Widely reported (Law360, Carolina Journal, The Assembly). Grounding quote: 'By filing that motion, Calloway-Durham violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. ... These arguments lacked any chance of success, and a reasonable attorney would have recognized that shortcoming. The Court further concludes that she filed the motion to unnecessarily delay trial. ... To address these violations and deter similar conduct, the Court imposes the following sanctions. First, it formally admonishes both Calloway-Durham and NCDOJ. Second, the Court will require that, for the next year, all of Calloway-Durham's filings in federal court must be co-signed by someone who will attest that the filing complies with Rule 11.'
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median case duration in the sampled dockets: 461 days (N = 5).
Median motion-to-ruling time: 146 days (N = 4).