SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Robert V. Luetkenhaus

Last decided St LouisJul 2026
Decisions 3,106since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's record requires comparing their performance against the broader bench. Robert V. Luetkenhaus's 35% approval rate since 2016 is situated within a local bench range of 30% to 78%. In the most recent reporting period, his 37% approval rate sits 14 percentage points below the St Louis office average of 51%. These figures are derived from a docket of 3,106 decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 35%
Decisions on record 3,106
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Luetkenhaus St Louis National
Approval rate 37% 51% 58%
Fully favorable 29% — —
Denials 63% — —

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

Judge Luetkenhaus
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY26
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

Since December 2016, the approval rate for Robert V. Luetkenhaus has shown variation. While the rate reached 53% in 2017, it subsequently adjusted and has remained within a range between 30% and 37% in recent years. This pattern reflects a consistent approach to case evaluation over the last several years, with the most recent period aligning closely with his long-term average.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Luetkenhaus'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 St Louis hearing office

The St Louis hearing office serves you and other claimants across Missouri and the surrounding region. As of the most recent data, 20 judges have their most recent record at this location, which maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 51%. You can expect a formal hearing process where the focus remains on the medical and vocational evidence you present.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is St Louis

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the assignment of a judge is essentially random. There are 20 judges whose most recent office on record is the St Louis office. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 30% to 78% since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
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