SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Robert M. McPhail

Last decided San AntonioJul 2026
Decisions 3,722since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes to understand how a judge performs relative to their peers. While the 45% approval rate on record since 2016 provides a long-term view, recent performance is also critical. In the latest reporting period, the judge maintained a 53% approval rate, which is +1 points above the San Antonio office average of 52%.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 45%
Decisions on record 3,722
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge McPhail San Antonio National
Approval rate 53% 52% 58%
Fully favorable 46% — —
Denials 47% — —

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

Judge McPhail
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

Since 2016, your approval rate for Robert M. McPhail has shown significant variation. After a period of lower approval rates around 2019, the trend shifted upward, reaching a peak of 64% in 2025. The most recent data from 2026 shows a 53% approval rate, which indicates a slight cooling from the previous year's high. This pattern suggests that the judge's decision-making process is responsive to changing evidentiary standards or case complexities over time.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge McPhail'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 San Antonio hearing office

Robert M. McPhail's most recent office on record is the San Antonio hearing office, which serves the surrounding region in Texas. This office hosts a bench of 23 judges who manage a high volume of disability claims. With an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 52%, the environment is typical of large urban hearing centers where evidence quality is paramount.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is San Antonio

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 23 judges whose most recent office on record is the San Antonio office, with 17 of them having decided cases in the latest SSA file. Approval rates among this bench vary widely, ranging from 18% to 70% on their since-2016 records.

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