SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Kenton W. Fulton

Last decided Oklahoma CityJul 2026
Decisions 3,076since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. While your judge's 61% approval rate covers all decisions since 2016, the latest-period figures provide a snapshot of recent activity. In the most recent reporting period, Kenton W. Fulton maintained a 70% approval rate, which is 12 points higher than the national average of 58%. These figures rely on a significant volume of decisions, providing a stable basis for analysis.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 61%
Decisions on record 3,076
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Fulton Oklahoma City National
Approval rate 70% 71% 58%
Fully favorable 62% — —
Denials 30% — —

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

Judge Fulton
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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

Kenton W. Fulton has issued 3,076 decisions on record since 2016. The yearly trend shows a fluctuating pattern, with approval rates moving from 59% in 2016 to 70% in 2026. The most recent fiscal year-to-date data shows a 70% approval rate, suggesting recent decisions remain consistent with this upward trend. This latest period reflects a continuation of the patterns observed in recent years, though each case remains unique.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Fulton'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 Oklahoma City hearing office

Kenton W. Fulton's most recent office on record is Oklahoma City, which serves claimants across Oklahoma. This office maintains a bench of 17 judges, reflecting a diverse range of decision-making patterns. The office-wide approval rate in the latest period was 71%, providing context for the local hearing environment.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Oklahoma City

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge assigned to your hearing is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is Oklahoma City, 11 of whom decided cases in the latest file. Approval rates among this bench range from 45% to 85% on their records since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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