SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Evangeline Mariano-Jackson

Last decided SeattleJul 2026
Decisions 4,214since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, the 68% approval rate for Evangeline Mariano-Jackson sits above the 55% office average, the 61% state average, and the 58% national average. The record since 2016 includes 4,214 decisions with a 54% approval rate, which compares to the 27% to 68% range of the 5 judges active in the office's latest file.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Mariano-Jackson Seattle National
Approval rate 68% 55% 58%
Fully favorable 59% — —
Denials 32% — —
Decisions 415 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 54%
Decisions on record 4,214

SSA publishes no office- or national-level breakdown of fully favorable and denial rates. The 12 months are SSA's figures for this fiscal year to date plus the rest of the previous fiscal year; how we calculate them.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Mariano-Jackson's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Mariano-Jackson
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
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

Evangeline Mariano-Jackson has issued 4,214 decisions on record since 2016. The yearly approval rate fluctuated in the early years of this window, reaching 45% in 2020 and 2021 before trending upward. The 68% approval rate over the most recent 12 months sits above the 54% record since 2016.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Mariano-Jackson'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 Seattle hearing office

The Seattle hearing office serves you across Washington and the surrounding region. As of the most recent data through July 2026, this office maintains a bench of 23 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the specific medical evidence provided in your file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Seattle

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Seattle hearing office, the 5 judges who decided cases here in SSA's latest file range from 23% to 84% in their approval rates over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. There are 23 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, though only 5 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file.

Judges with similar approval rates

These active judges' approval rates over the same 12 months (July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026) are closest to Judge Mariano-Jackson's 68%. Two of them last decided cases in Washington. With too few close matches there, the rest come from SSA's Seattle region.

Rates within 5 points of each other are hard to tell apart at a typical caseload, so treat these as judges with comparable records, not a ranking. See Judge Mariano-Jackson and the three closest side by side →

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