Brian Lucas is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the NHC Chicago office with a lifetime approval rate of 52% across 18,328 decisions. This sits below the national average of 58%, though recent trends show higher approval rates. Because case assignment is random, your outcome depends on the evidence you present. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific 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 Lucas has presided over 18,328 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, your approval rate reached 62%, which is 1 percentage point above the current NHC Chicago office average but 6 points below the national average. These figures offer a window into past performance across a decade of service. 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 Lucas'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 10-year tenure, Judge Lucas has demonstrated a shift in decision-making patterns. While early years on the bench saw approval rates hovering in the high 40% range, the data indicates a clear upward trend in recent years, with approval rates reaching 64% in 2025. This recent performance represents a notable departure from earlier career averages. The current trend suggests a more favorable environment for your claim compared to the first several years on the bench.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lucas'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.
About the NHC Chicago hearing office
The NHC Chicago Hearing Office serves a large population across Illinois, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office operates under the broader SSA mandate to provide fair and timely hearings. You can expect a rigorous review of medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can visit the NHC Chicago 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 to Judge Lucas is essentially random. Across the NHC Chicago office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 41% to 69%. Because of this variance, understanding the office-wide landscape is helpful for your claim. For preparation purposes, the guidance remains consistent regardless of which judge is 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.



