Allen G. Erickson is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Tacoma WA hearing office. With a lifetime approval rate of 31% over 20,277 lifetime decisions, this judge sits below the national average of 58%. Because case assignment is random, understanding your judge's history is a vital part of preparing your claim. 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 Erickson has issued 20,277 lifetime decisions during a 10-year tenure on the bench. In the most recent reporting period, the judge recorded an approval rate of 32%, which sits 27 percentage points below the current Tacoma WA office average of 58%. These figures provide a high-level view of historical trends across a significant volume of cases.
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 Erickson'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 the past decade, your judge's approval rate has fluctuated while maintaining a generally steady pattern. The most recent reporting period shows an approval rate of 32%, which remains consistent with the long-term career average. This pattern suggests a stable approach to evaluating the medical and vocational evidence presented in your case.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Erickson'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 Erickson? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Tacoma WA hearing office
The Tacoma WA hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout the region, managing a high volume of disability cases. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains a latest approval rate of 58%. You should expect a formal process focused on the specific medical documentation required by SSA regulations. You can visit the Tacoma WA 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 you cannot choose your judge. Within the Tacoma WA hearing office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 ALJs range from 31% to 72%. This variance highlights why it is important to focus on the strength of your own medical evidence regardless of the specific judge assigned to your hearing.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
