Gerard W. Langan is an SSA ALJ at the Wilkes Barre office. With a lifetime approval rate of 50% over 23,468 lifetime decisions, his record sits below the national average of 58%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. Because your assigned judge impacts your case, an attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this bench.
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
Judge Langan has presided over 23,468 lifetime decisions during his 10-year tenure. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate was 47%, which is 4 percentage points above the Wilkes Barre office average of 46% but 8 points below the national average of 58%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how cases have historically been decided in his courtroom. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Langan'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
The approval trend for Judge Langan has seen fluctuations over his decade on the bench. After starting with rates in the mid-50% range, the data shows a dip to 43% in 2021, followed by a recovery to 52% in 2024. The most recent 47% approval rate reflects a slight cooling from that recent peak. This pattern suggests that while his decision-making has remained relatively stable, it is sensitive to the specific evidence and case mix presented in any given year.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Langan'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?
About the Wilkes Barre hearing office
The Wilkes Barre Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Pennsylvania and the surrounding region. It is staffed by 6 judges who manage a high volume of disability claims. The office currently maintains an average approval rate of 46%. You should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical records and work history. You can see the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment is essentially random. Within the Wilkes Barre office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 29% to 59%. Because you cannot choose your judge, it is important to focus on the strength of your medical evidence and vocational testimony. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
