Melvyn B. Kalt is an Administrative Law Judge at the Oak Park Hearing Office. Over 3 years on the bench, 64% of their 1,660 lifetime decisions have been approvals. This is 6% above the national average of 58%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case for the best possible outcome.
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 hearing. Judge Kalt maintains a lifetime approval rate of 64% across 1,660 lifetime decisions. This performance is 8% above the state average and 6% above the national average of 58%. These figures reflect a significant volume of cases, providing a stable data set for review.
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 Kalt'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 3-year tenure, your judge's approval rate has shifted. While early years saw rates of 77% in 2016 and 74% in 2017, the most recent data from 2018 shows an approval rate of 54%. This trend may reflect changes in the types of cases assigned or the specific evidence presented in recent dockets. The current pattern signals a move toward alignment with broader regional averages.
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.
Have a hearing with Judge Kalt? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Oak Park hearing office
The Oak Park Hearing Office serves a diverse population across Illinois, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 67%. You can expect a formal environment where medical documentation and vocational testimony are prioritized. You can see the Oak Park Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Oak Park Hearing Office, individual lifetime approval rates among the 6 ALJs range from 50% to 80%. This variance highlights that while the office operates under unified federal guidelines, each judge brings a unique approach to evaluating evidence. You can view the full roster of judges at the Oak Park Hearing Office page.
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.
