SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. William Musseman

Last decided Colorado SpringsSep 2021
Decisions 2,142since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

When evaluating a judge's history, it is helpful to compare figures from the same timeframe. The 29% approval rate for William Musseman reflects his total record since 2016, which can be measured against the 21% to 74% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is the same. These statistics rely on a volume of 2,142 decisions, providing a look at past patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 29%
Decisions on record 2,142

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Musseman. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 24, 2021. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Musseman
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY21
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 trend for William Musseman shows a period of fluctuation followed by a steady pattern. After an initial approval rate of 30% in 2016 and a peak of 37% in 2017, the rate settled into a range between 25% and 27% through the remainder of his record ending in 2021. With 2,142 total decisions on record, this data reflects a consistent approach to case evaluation over the observed window.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Musseman'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 Colorado Springs hearing office

The Colorado Springs Hearing Office serves you and other claimants in the region. There are 10 judges with their most recent record at this location. If you are appearing at this office, you should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical documentation and work history. You can see the Colorado Springs Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Colorado Springs

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 10 judges whose most recent office on record is the Colorado Springs Hearing Office, with approval rates ranging from 21% to 74%. While the specific judge matters, the fundamental requirements for proving disability remain consistent. For your preparation, 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