SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Robert Baker

On record 13 decisions since 2026

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing a judge's performance requires looking at consistent data periods. Robert Baker maintains a 62% lifetime approval rate, which sits within the 32% to 80% range observed across the Johnstown bench. In the most recent reporting period, the 62% approval rate outperformed the office-wide latest-period average of 55% by 7 percentage points. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2026
Approval rate 62%
Decisions on record 13
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Baker Johnstown National
Approval rate 62% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 54%
Denials 38%

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 Baker's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Baker
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY26
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

The record for Robert Baker includes 13 decisions dating back to 2016. The data shows an approval rate of 62% during the 2026 reporting period. Because the latest-period figures align with the lifetime total, the current trend reflects a consistent approach to case evaluation. This pattern provides a stable baseline for understanding how the judge has historically approached disability claims in the Johnstown office.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Baker'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 Johnstown hearing office

The Johnstown hearing office serves you throughout the Pennsylvania region. This office maintains a diverse bench of 8 judges on record, with an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 55%. You can expect a formal hearing process where evidence quality and medical documentation remain the primary factors in any decision. You can see the Johnstown 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 your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 8 judges on record at this office since 2016, 3 of whom reported in the latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 32% to 80% over their respective careers. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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