Matthew J. Gordon maintains a lifetime approval rate of 63% across 21,142 decisions, which sits above the national average of 58%. In the latest reporting period, their 68% approval rate outperformed the West Des Moines office average by 8 percentage points. While these statistics offer a helpful look at past trends, they are not a prediction for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the unique requirements of this judge's courtroom.
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
Comparing a judge's performance to broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. Judge Gordon maintains a 63% lifetime approval rate, which is higher than the 55% office-wide average and the 58% national average. These figures are derived from a docket of 21,142 lifetime decisions, offering a stable view of past trends.
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 Gordon'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 a decade on the bench, Judge Gordon has demonstrated a steady approach to disability adjudication. While the approval rate was 75% in 2016, it stabilized between 61% and 65% for most of the following years. The most recent data shows an approval rate of 69%, indicating a slight uptick compared to the long-term average.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Gordon'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 Gordon? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the West Des Moines hearing office
The West Des Moines hearing office serves claimants across the region, managing a high volume of disability cases with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently reports an approval rate of 55%. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. Visit the West Des Moines hearing office page for more information.
Other judges at this hearing office
The SSA assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the West Des Moines hearing office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 38% to 70%. This variance highlights why understanding the tendencies of your assigned judge is a common part of hearing preparation.
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.
