S. Kate Vaughan
How Judge Vaughan rules, drawn from 31 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
How Judge Vaughan decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In the Roberts appeal, the claimant obtained remand by showing that the ALJ failed to investigate and account for a distinct line of evidence concerning sleep-related impairments. Judge Vaughan treated the omission as harmful because it also affected the medical-opinion and testimony analyses.
“The ALJ failed to adequately develop the record and impermissibly ignored parts of the evidence by not considering whether Plaintiff had a sleep-related impairment at step two. ... This was error.”
Procedural preferences
The Cody order illustrates that evidence summaries must be tied to a developed claim of harmful error; the court will not construct an argument from citations alone.
“summarizing facts without providing analysis or legal argument is not enough to demonstrate harmful error.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“the Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED and this case is REMANDED for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“ORDER AFFIRMING THE COMMISSIONER'S DECISION by Hon. S. Kate Vaughan. ... JUDGMENT BY COURT: By Order of the Court, the decision of the Commissioner is AFFIRMED.”
“the Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDS the matter for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDS the matter for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“it is ORDERED that the Commissioner's decision in regard to Plaintiff's applications for a period of disability, disability insurance benefits, and supplemental security income under Titles II and XVI of the Social Security Act be REVERSED and REMANDED to the Acting Commissioner of Social Security for further administrative proceedings.”
“it is ORDERED that Commissioner's decision in regard to Plaintiff's application for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act be REVERSED AND REMANDED to the Commissioner of Social Security for a new hearing and a new decision by an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), leaving the Commissioner's decision regarding Plaintiff's application for Supplemental Security Income benefits under Title XVI of the Social Security Act undisturbed.”
“the Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's final decision and DISMISSES the case with prejudice.”
“the Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDS the matter for further administrative proceedings under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's final decision and DISMISSES the case with prejudice.”
“the Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDS the matter for a finding of disability under sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”
“the Court REVERSES the Commissioner's final decision and REMANDS the matter for a finding of disability.”
“the Court AFFIRMS the Commissioner's final decision and DISMISSES the case with prejudice.”
Draft for Judge Vaughan with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Vaughan, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Vaughan's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace