Barbara Artuso is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Johnstown Hearing Office. Over her 2 years on the bench, 57% of her 3,042 lifetime decisions have been approvals. This is 4% above the Johnstown average. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific bench.
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
Comparing a judge's approval rate to broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. Judge Artuso currently holds a 57% lifetime approval rate, which stands 2 points above the state average and 4 points above the Johnstown office average. These metrics are derived from a significant volume of 3,042 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Artuso'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
Over her 2 years on the bench, Judge Artuso has maintained a consistent approach to disability claims. Her yearly trend shows a slight shift from 58% in 2016 to 56% in 2017, reflecting a steady pattern of adjudication across her 3,042 lifetime decisions. This minor variance is common and often relates to changes in the specific mix of medical evidence presented in cases.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Artuso'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 Artuso? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Johnstown hearing office
The Johnstown Hearing Office serves a broad population across Pennsylvania, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 53%. You can expect a formal process focused on the medical evidence supporting your claim. You can see the Johnstown Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment is essentially random. Across the 6 judges at the Johnstown office, lifetime approval rates vary significantly, ranging from 32% to 81%. This wide spectrum highlights why understanding the local bench is helpful for your preparation. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.
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.
