Kelly B. Lind is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Orange Hearing Office, with a lifetime approval rate of 69% over 1,915 lifetime decisions. This rate sits above the national average of 58%. While these figures offer insight into past trends, they are not predictions for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case for the hearing.
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 Lind's approval performance is measured against the Orange Hearing Office latest rate of 62%, the state average of 59%, and the national average of 58%. These figures are derived from 1,915 lifetime decisions made during their tenure. By comparing these benchmarks, you can see how this judge's history aligns with broader trends in the Social Security Administration system.
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 Lind'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 2 years on the bench, Judge Lind has maintained a steady approval trend. Starting with a 68% approval rate in 2018, the record moved to 69% in 2019. This stability suggests a consistent approach to evaluating your evidence and medical documentation. The latest period reflects a continuation of this steady pattern, providing a reliable baseline for understanding how the judge approaches disability claims.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lind'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 with Judge Lind? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Orange hearing office
The Orange Hearing Office serves a large population in California, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 62%. You can expect a professional environment focused on the rigorous evaluation of your medical and vocational evidence. See the Orange Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Orange Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates across the bench range from 44% to 69%. Because each judge may weigh evidence differently, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful.
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.
