SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. W. Clark

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Baltimore Hearing Office · 2 years on the bench · 499 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Clark?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

When evaluating your hearing, it is helpful to look at how a judge's history compares to broader benchmarks. Judge Clark holds a lifetime approval rate of 47%, which tracks 11% percentage points below the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from 499 lifetime decisions made during their tenure. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Clark Baltimore National
Approval rate 47% 66% 58%
Fully favorable 40%
Denials 53%

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

Judge Clark
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY17
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Judge Clark has served on the bench for 2 years, during which time approval patterns have shown a notable shift. While the 2016 approval rate was 69%, the data from 2017 shows a decline to 28%. This trend indicates a change in the volume of allowances compared to earlier periods. Such shifts often reflect changes in the types of cases heard or the specific medical evidence presented in those dockets.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Clark'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 with Judge W. Clark? See if a free benefits review fits your case.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Baltimore hearing office

The Baltimore Hearing Office serves a large population of claimants across Maryland and the surrounding region. It maintains a busy docket with a bench of 6 judges who manage cases annually. The office currently reports an approval rate of 66%, which provides a local context for your upcoming hearing. You can visit the Baltimore Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment is essentially random. Across the Baltimore Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates for the 6 judges on the bench range from 46% to 81%. This variance highlights why it is important to focus on the strength of your own medical evidence regardless of which judge is assigned to your file.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

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