Kathryn Bridges is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the NHC CHICAGO office, with a lifetime approval rate of 46% across 17,059 decisions. While this rate sits below the national average, your case outcome depends on the specific medical evidence you present. Because the SSA assigns cases randomly, the judge you draw matters. 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
Judge Bridges maintains a lifetime approval rate of 46% across 17,059 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, the judge recorded an approval rate of 49%, which is 5 percentage points lower than the NHC Chicago office average and 12 points below the national average. This data provides a statistical baseline for the judge's tenure, though aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than 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 Bridges'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 a 10-year tenure, your judge's approval rate has shown notable fluctuations. After an initial period of lower approval rates in 2016, the rate rose through 2018 before experiencing a decline in 2021 and 2022. Recent data from 2024 and 2025 indicates a return to a 56% approval rate, suggesting a shift in recent decision-making patterns. These trends may reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Bridges'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.
About the NHC Chicago hearing office
The NHC Chicago Hearing Office serves a broad population in Illinois and the surrounding region. It is one of three offices where Judge Bridges has presided during a 10-year career. You can expect a high-volume environment where thorough documentation is essential to a successful outcome. You can see the NHC Chicago Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The SSA assigns cases to you using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the NHC Chicago office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 41% to 69%. While these variations exist, the fundamental requirements for proving disability remain consistent across all courtrooms. You can find the full ALJ roster on the NHC Chicago hearing office page.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.



