SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Charles A. Dominick

SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office · 9 years on the bench · 16,328 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled?

Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's history requires looking at the broader context of their tenure. Judge Dominick has maintained a 52% lifetime approval rate, which compares against the latest office-wide performance of 46% and the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from a significant docket of 16,328 decisions, providing a reliable statistical foundation for your analysis. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Dominick Wilkes Barre National
Approval rate 52% 46% 58%
Fully favorable 50%
Denials 45%

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

Judge Dominick
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 9 years on the bench, Judge Dominick has shown a shift in his decision-making trajectory. While his early years saw approval rates hovering in the mid-40s, the trend line moved upward significantly starting in 2022, reaching a peak of 60% in 2023. Recent data shows the rate stabilizing between 56% and 57%. This pattern suggests a shift in case outcomes that may reflect changes in the complexity of the evidence presented or evolving internal guidance.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Dominick'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 Wilkes Barre hearing office

The Wilkes Barre Hearing Office serves a broad population across Pennsylvania, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains a latest-period approval rate of 46%. You should expect a professional environment focused on the rigorous application of 20 CFR Part 404 standards. You can see the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench vary widely, ranging from 29% to 59%. This variance highlights why focusing on the strength of your own medical evidence is the most effective strategy. You can view the full roster of judges on the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office page.

Your odds change dramatically 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