SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Melvyn B. Kalt

Last decided Oak ParkSep 2018
Decisions 251since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same period to ensure accuracy. The 65% approval rate for Melvyn B. Kalt reflects all decisions on record since 2016, which you can compare against the 36% to 83% range observed among other judges whose most recent office on record is Oak Park. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how different judges have historically approached cases. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 65%
Decisions on record 251

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Kalt. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 28, 2018. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Kalt's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Kalt
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY18
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

The approval rate for Melvyn B. Kalt across 251 decisions on record since 2016 shows a shift in trend. While the approval rate was 75% in 2016 and 76% in 2017, it was 52% in 2018. This pattern reflects the judge's historical decision-making within the provided data window. The latest period on record reflects a departure from the earlier, higher approval rates, which may be influenced by changes in the specific mix of cases or evidence presented.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Kalt'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 Oak Park hearing office

Melvyn B. Kalt's most recent office on record is the Oak Park hearing office, with decisions there through September 2018. This office serves the region and maintains a bench of 19 judges whose most recent records are tied to this location. You can expect a standard hearing process where evidence quality remains the primary factor in your decision. You can see the Oak Park Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Oak Park

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 19 judges whose most recent office on record is Oak Park, with approval rates ranging from 36% to 83% on their since-2016 records. Because approval rates vary significantly across this bench, understanding the broader office context is useful for you. 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