SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Mikel Lupisella

Last decided Mt Pleasant MIJul 2026
Decisions 3,674since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes to ensure accuracy. While Mikel Lupisella has a 57% approval rate since 2016, the latest-period approval rate of 66% offers a view of more recent activity. This latest figure sits 1 point above the office average, 6 points above the state average, and 8 points above the national average. These figures are based on a significant volume of decisions, providing statistical confidence.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 57%
Decisions on record 3,674
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Lupisella Mt Pleasant MI National
Approval rate 66% 65% 58%
Fully favorable 63% — —
Denials 34% — —

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

Judge Lupisella
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

The approval rate for Mikel Lupisella has shown notable fluctuations since 2016. After a period of relative stability, the data shows a decline in 2021 and 2022 before a marked increase in 2025 and 2026. With 3,674 total decisions on record, the recent trend indicates a shift toward higher approval rates compared to the mid-record low points.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lupisella'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 Mt Pleasant MI hearing office

Mikel Lupisella's most recent office on record is the MT Pleasant MI hearing office, with the last recorded decision there in July 2026. This office maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 65%. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on the evaluation of your medical evidence and vocational testimony.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Mt Pleasant MI

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. At the MT Pleasant MI office, there are 8 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with 6 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among these peers range from 30% to 63% on their records since 2016.

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