SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Edward Malvey

Last decided ManchesterJul 2026
Decisions 2,805since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. While your judge's overall approval rate on record since 2016 is 60%, his latest-period approval rate of 64% sits 7 percentage points higher than the Manchester office's latest-period rate of 57%. These figures are derived from a significant volume of cases, providing a stable view of past activity. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 60%
Decisions on record 2,805
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Malvey Manchester National
Approval rate 64% 57% 58%
Fully favorable 59% — —
Denials 36% — —

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

Judge Malvey
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 Edward Malvey has shown fluctuations, moving from 63% in 2017 to a low of 50% in 2019 before trending upward. Recent years have seen a more consistent pattern, with the 2026 fiscal year-to-date approval rate sitting at 64%. This latest period shows a rate that remains above the office average, reflecting a continuation of the patterns observed in recent years. The data suggests a stable approach to case evaluation over the most recent reporting cycles.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Malvey'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 Manchester hearing office

The Manchester hearing office serves claimants across New Hampshire and the surrounding region. As one of 11 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, Edward Malvey contributes to a bench that maintains an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 57%. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your file. You can see the Manchester hearing office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Manchester

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 11 judges whose most recent office on record is the Manchester office, with 6 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file from July 2026. Approval rates for this bench range from 26% to 86% based on their records 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