Susan E. Huntsman
How Judge Huntsman decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
When a vocational expert identifies a job the Dictionary of Occupational Titles rates as requiring a higher reasoning, reaching, or handling level than the claimant's residual functional capacity allows, the judge treats that as a live, reversible conflict unless the ALJ actually resolved it on the record -- a generic 'no conflicts' assurance from the expert is not enough.
“Once it appears there is a conflict between the VE's testimony and the DOT, the ALJ must resolve that conflict in a reasoned manner -- and not with a generalized affirmation that there are 'no conflicts.'”
On a step-one substantial-gainful-activity dispute, an ALJ's arithmetic error is harmless if the ALJ nonetheless proceeded through the full five-step analysis and the claimant does not argue her condition changed between the disputed years and the rest of the relevant period.
“The Court agrees any step-one error was harmless.”
Procedural preferences
Post-judgment fee requests (Section 406(b), reached through a Rule 60(b)(6) motion) get real scrutiny on timing: counsel is expected to move within weeks of a notice of award, and an unexplained delay of many months -- even after being invited to justify it -- will sink the motion.
“it is hard to comprehend why -- in an ordinary case -- a social security claimant's attorney could not [move for fees] within a few months of their receipt of the Notice of Award.”
Briefing that blows past the page or word limits set by the scheduling order draws an explicit warning, not just a quiet pass.
“Plaintiff's counsel is cautioned that briefs violating this Court's rules or orders are subject to being stricken.”
Cautions
Winning a remand does not guarantee EAJA fees: if the 'significant number of jobs' question the case turned on is genuinely unsettled among district courts, the government's losing position can still be found substantially justified.
“the Court finds the Commissioner was substantially justified in arguing that the ALJ's error in this case was harmless.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“For the reasons explained below, the Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's decision denying benefits.”
“It cannot square the ALJ's analysis of medical opinions with the guidelines set forth in 20 C.F.R. Section 416.920c. As such, the Court reverses the decision for further proceedings.”
“The Court finds the ALJ erred in failing to resolve the conflict and reverses on this basis.”
“The Court agrees that the ALJ's step-five findings were in error and, therefore, does not reach Plaintiff's other arguments.”
“The Court agrees, and Plaintiff's motion will be denied.”
“the Court finds the Rule 60(b) motion was not made within a reasonable time, as required by Rule 60(c)(1). The motion for relief from judgment will be denied”
“as a result, the motion for Section 406(b) fees will also be denied.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
Median motion-to-ruling time: 491.5 days (N = 26).
Huntsman's consent docket is dominated by Social Security disability appeals. She also handles recommendations, discovery disputes, settlement conferences, and preliminary criminal proceedings in other judges' cases. The classified outcomes here are limited to dispositive rulings she signed in consent matters.
Put Judge Huntsman's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Huntsman actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Huntsman's own signed orders and cites them.