SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Melvin G. Olmscheid

Last decided BaltimoreJul 2026
Decisions 3,537since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates provides context for how a judge's decisions align with broader trends. Melvin G. Olmscheid's 64% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, is measured against the Baltimore office's 60%, the state's 56%, and the national average of 58% for the same period. His longer-term record since 2016 shows a 68% approval rate across 3,537 total decisions.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Olmscheid Baltimore National
Approval rate 64% 60% 58%
Fully favorable 55% — —
Denials 36% — —
Decisions 360 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 68%
Decisions on record 3,537

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

Judge Olmscheid
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, Melvin G. Olmscheid has issued 3,537 decisions. His approval rate has fluctuated, reaching a high of 72% in 2020 and a low of 60% in 2016. The most recent 12 months to July 31, 2026, show an approval rate of 64%, which is lower than his overall record of 68% since 2016.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Olmscheid'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 Baltimore hearing office

The Baltimore office serves claimants across Maryland and the surrounding region. There are 24 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, with 8 of them having decided cases in SSA's latest file as of July 2026. The office recorded a 60% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Baltimore

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Approval rates vary across the Baltimore bench, with the 8 judges who decided cases here in SSA's latest file ranging from 41% to 77% over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. There are 24 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, 8 of whom 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 Olmscheid's 64%. Three of them last decided cases in Maryland. With too few close matches there, the rest come from SSA's Philadelphia 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 Olmscheid 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