SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Janet L. Alaga-Gadigian

On record 3,696 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rates for Janet L. Alaga-Gadigian reflect a consistent history of decision-making at the Oak Park office. Her lifetime approval rate of 69% sits within the office-wide range of 36% to 83% for all judges on record. In the most recent reporting period, her 80% approval rate compares favorably to the office rate of 66%, the state rate of 60%, and the national rate of 58%. These figures represent historical trends rather than future outcomes.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 69%
Decisions on record 3,696
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Alaga-Gadigian Oak Park National
Approval rate 80% 66% 58%
Fully favorable 70%
Denials 20%

Office- and national-level breakdowns of fully favorable vs denial rates aren't currently published by SSA in the per-office disposition data. The judge's own breakdown is the detail we have today.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Alaga-Gadigian's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Alaga-Gadigian
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since 2016, the decision pattern for Janet L. Alaga-Gadigian has shown variability. After starting with a 66% approval rate, her yearly figures have fluctuated, reaching 80% in the 2026 reporting period. With 3,696 total decisions on record, the data shows a trend toward higher approval rates in recent years, particularly since 2024.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Alaga-Gadigian's bench. Judge-specific preparation guidance requires a corpus of public Appeals Council decisions involving each judge, which we haven't built yet.

  • Bring a clean treating-physician record. Longitudinal primary-care or specialist notes spanning the disability period, with consistent symptom documentation, are typically the strongest evidence at hearing. A single month's records usually aren't enough.
  • Don't rely on consultative exams alone. If your medical evidence is built primarily around a one-time CE finding, expect detailed questioning. Supplement with treating-source statements where possible.
  • Prepare for daily-activity questions. Have honest, specific answers about a typical day. Answers that conflict with the medical record (in either direction) tend to hurt credibility.
  • Expect transferable-skills probing. A vocational expert will usually testify about jobs available to someone with your limitations. Your representative should be prepared to cross-examine.

Hearing scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Oak Park hearing office

The Oak Park hearing office serves claimants throughout the region and maintains a bench of 20 judges on record. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 66%, providing a local benchmark for your claim. You can expect a standard administrative hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can visit the Oak Park hearing office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 20 judges on record at this office since 2016, 10 of whom reported in the latest period, with lifetime approval rates ranging from 36% to 83%. Because each judge brings a unique approach to the bench, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful for your preparation.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.

Frequently asked questions