SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. S. A. Bryant

Last decided WashingtonJul 2026
Decisions 1,082since 2023

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates provides context for how a judge's decisions align with broader trends. S. A. Bryant's 87% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, is measured against the Washington office's 63% rate, the state's 58% rate, and the national 58% rate over that same period. These figures are based on 400 decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your hearing.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Bryant Washington National
Approval rate 87% 63% 58%
Fully favorable 82% — —
Denials 13% — —
Decisions 400 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2023
Approval rate 85%
Decisions on record 1,082

SSA publishes no office- or national-level breakdown of fully favorable and denial rates. The 12 months are SSA's figures for this fiscal year to date plus the rest of the previous fiscal year; how we calculate them.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Bryant
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY23FY26
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 April 2023, S. A. Bryant has issued 1,082 decisions. The yearly approval rate has moved from 80% in 2023 to 85% in 2024, 83% in 2025, and 88% in 2026. The most recent 12 months sit above the 85% approval rate recorded since April 2023.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Bryant'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 Washington hearing office

The Washington hearing office serves the District of Columbia and surrounding areas. This office has a bench of 33 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with 14 of them having decided cases in SSA's latest file as of July 31, 2026. The office recorded a 63% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Washington

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Among the 33 judges whose most recent office on record is Washington, 14 decided cases in SSA's latest file and range from 32% to 87% in approval rates over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Judges with similar approval rates

These active judges' approval rates over the same 12 months (July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026) are closest to Judge Bryant's 87%. Two of them last decided cases in District of Columbia. With too few close matches there, the rest come from other regions.

Rates within 5 points of each other are hard to tell apart at a typical caseload, so treat these as judges with comparable records, not a ranking. See Judge Bryant and the three closest side by side →

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