SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lawrence E. Blatnik

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 2,616 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

The approval rate for Lawrence E. Blatnik is based on a record of 2,616 decisions since 2016. When evaluating this figure, consider the broader context of the Lansing hearing office, where judges range from 37% to 68% in their lifetime approval rates. This variation highlights how judicial discretion plays a role in the hearing process. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 59%
Decisions on record 2,616

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Blatnik. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 29, 2023. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Blatnik
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY23
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 approval rate for Lawrence E. Blatnik has shown a generally steady trend. After starting at 54% in 2016, the rate reached 68% in the 2023 data window. This pattern reflects a consistent approach to the evidence presented in disability claims. The latest period indicates a continuation of this trend, suggesting that the judge's decision-making process remains stable over time.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Blatnik'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 Lansing hearing office

The Lansing hearing office serves claimants throughout the region, providing a local venue for disability hearings. The office maintains a bench of 9 judges on record, ensuring that cases are processed through a structured administrative system. You can expect a formal environment where your medical documentation and testimony are the primary drivers of the outcome. See the Lansing 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 to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 9 judges on record at this office since 2016, 5 of whom are reported in the latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 37% to 68% lifetime. You can find more information on the Lansing hearing office page.

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