John Aletta is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Hartford office. Over 9 years on the bench, you have seen 27% of cases approved across 14,170 lifetime decisions. This rate is 33% below the Hartford office average. Because case assignment is random, the judge you draw matters. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case for the specific standards John Aletta applies.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Judge Aletta has issued 14,170 lifetime decisions during his 9 years on the bench. His lifetime approval rate of 27% provides a statistical baseline when compared to the Hartford Hearing Office latest approval rate of 60% and the national average of 58%. These figures represent a significant volume of cases, offering a stable look at historical trends.
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 Aletta's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Since joining the bench in 2016, Judge Aletta's approval rate has shifted from an initial 44% to a more consistent range that has persisted through recent years. The latest reporting period shows a rate of 26%, which remains aligned with his long-term average. This pattern suggests a steady approach to case evaluation that has remained largely unchanged over the last several years.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Aletta'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 with Judge Aletta? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Hartford hearing office
The Hartford Hearing Office serves you throughout Connecticut and the surrounding region. It is staffed by a team of 6 judges who manage a high volume of disability claims. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 60%, reflecting the local environment for SSDI hearings. You can visit the Hartford Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Hartford Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 27% to 56%. While these variations exist, the fundamental requirements for proving disability remain consistent across all courtrooms.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
