SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Raghav Kotval

On record 3,333 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing a judge's performance requires looking at consistent periods. While Raghav Kotval maintains a 50% lifetime approval rate, his latest-period approval rate of 52% sits 11 percentage points below the Washington office average of 63%. These figures are derived from a significant docket of 3,333 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 50%
Decisions on record 3,333
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Kotval Washington National
Approval rate 52% 63% 58%
Fully favorable 32%
Denials 48%

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

Judge Kotval
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

The record for Raghav Kotval spans from 2016 to 2026, showing a steady pattern of decision-making. His annual approval rates have fluctuated, with a recent yearly rate of 52% in 2026. This latest figure is largely consistent with his long-term average, suggesting a stable approach to case evaluation. The data reflects a judge who has processed a high volume of claims, providing a clear view of historical trends.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Kotval'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 Washington hearing office

The Washington hearing office serves you throughout the District of Columbia and surrounding areas. This office maintains a bench of 19 judges who oversee a high volume of disability claims. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 63%, which provides context for the local hearing environment. You can see the Washington 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 your assignment to Raghav Kotval is essentially random. There are 19 judges on record at this office since 2016, with 14 currently reporting in the latest SSA data. Approval rates across this bench vary widely, ranging from 33% to 85%. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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