SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Marc Jones

Last decided San AntonioJul 2026
Decisions 2,203since 2018

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing an approval rate requires looking at consistent data windows. While the national average approval rate is 58% for the latest period, Marc Jones's latest-period rate is 31%. Across his entire record since January 2018, he has maintained a 33% approval rate. These figures are derived from 2,203 decisions on record. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2018
Approval rate 33%
Decisions on record 2,203
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Jones San Antonio National
Approval rate 31% 52% 58%
Fully favorable 25% — —
Denials 69% — —

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

Judge Jones
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY18FY26
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

Since January 2018, the approval rate for Marc Jones has shown varied activity. After an initial period of relative stability, the rate saw an increase in 2025 before returning to 31% in the most recent partial fiscal year. With 2,203 total decisions on record, the data reflects a judge who has navigated a wide range of case volumes. The recent figures suggest a return toward his long-term average following a period of higher volatility.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Jones'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 San Antonio hearing office

Marc Jones's most recent office on record is the San Antonio hearing office, which serves the surrounding region of Texas. This office maintains a bench of 23 judges, with an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 52%. You can expect a structured hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is San Antonio

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the San Antonio hearing office, there are 23 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with 17 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among this group range from 18% to 70% on their records since 2016.

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