SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Livia Morales

Last decided Valparaiso INJul 2026
Decisions 3,525since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. While Livia Morales has an approval rate of 43% across 3,525 decisions on record since 2016, recent performance shows a 51% approval rate in the latest reporting period. This is 5 points below the Valparaiso IN office's latest-period rate of 56%. These figures provide a statistical baseline, though aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 43%
Decisions on record 3,525
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Morales Valparaiso IN National
Approval rate 51% 56% 58%
Fully favorable 35% — —
Denials 49% — —

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

Judge Morales
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

The approval rate for Livia Morales has fluctuated since 2016. With 3,525 decisions on record, the data indicates that your judge's approach is not static. The latest-period approval rate of 51% suggests a shift compared to the long-term average, which may reflect changes in case mix or evidence quality.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Morales'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 Valparaiso IN hearing office

Livia Morales's most recent office on record is the Valparaiso IN hearing office, with decisions there through July 2026. This office serves the surrounding region, and you can expect a standard administrative hearing process focused on your medical and vocational evidence. With 11 judges on the bench, the office maintains its own operational rhythm and approval standards.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Valparaiso IN

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 Valparaiso IN office, and 6 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file. These judges show an approval-rate range of 42% to 83% on their since-2016 records. 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