SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Lawrence E. Blatnik

Last decided LansingSep 2023
Decisions 2,616since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

When evaluating a judge's history, it is helpful to compare their performance against the broader bench. The 9 judges whose most recent office on record is the Lansing hearing office demonstrate an approval-rate range between 37% and 68% based on their records since 2016. With 2,616 decisions on record, Lawrence E. Blatnik provides a substantial data set for review. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

All decisions on record 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 January 2016, Lawrence E. Blatnik's approval rate has shown a generally stable trend with some year-over-year variation. Starting at 54% in 2016, the rate reached 68% by 2023 over a smaller volume of decisions. This pattern reflects his consistent approach to the 2,616 decisions on record. The recent data points suggest a continuation of his established decision-making habits, though each case remains unique based on the medical evidence you provide.

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 you and other claimants across Michigan as part of a regional network dedicated to processing disability appeals. With 9 judges on its historical bench, the office maintains a diverse range of decision patterns. You should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical documentation when appearing before this office. You can see the Lansing hearing office page for the full roster of judges.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Lansing

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with approval rates ranging from 37% to 68%. While you cannot choose your judge, understanding the office-wide environment can help you prepare. The guidance for your case remains consistent regardless of which judge is assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
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