SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Sung Park

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 3,056 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Comparing Sung Park's performance requires looking at consistent reporting periods. While his lifetime approval rate sits at 38%, his latest-period approval rate is 54%. This latest figure is 16 percentage points lower than the Los Angeles Downtown office average of 70%, 7 points below the state average of 61%, and 4 points below the national average of 58%. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 38%
Decisions on record 3,056
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Park Los Angeles Downtown National
Approval rate 54% 70% 58%
Fully favorable 46%
Denials 46%

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

Judge Park
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY26
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

Sung Park's record spans 3,056 decisions since 2016. The yearly trend shows a period of relative stability in the 30% range followed by a marked increase in approvals starting in 2025. The latest period reflects a continuation of this recent upward trend. This pattern suggests that recent case outcomes have diverged from the judge's long-term historical average.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Park'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 Los Angeles Downtown hearing office

The Los Angeles Downtown hearing office serves a large population in California. With a bench of 10 judges on record, the office maintains a latest-period approval rate of 70%. You can expect a formal hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Los Angeles Downtown Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

SSA assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. The Los Angeles Downtown office features 10 judges on record since 2016, 4 of whom reported in the latest period. These judges show a broad range of lifetime approval rates, spanning from 38% to 78%. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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