SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Leslie Perry-Dowdell

Last decided PittsburghJul 2026
Decisions 3,371since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing an approval rate requires looking at consistent timeframes and peer benchmarks. The 28% approval rate for Leslie Perry-Dowdell reflects a docket of 3,371 decisions since 2016. When evaluating this against the Pittsburgh office's bench, which ranges from 28% to 74% in approval rates, you can see where this judge sits relative to local peers. These figures represent historical data rather than a forecast for your specific claim.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 28%
Decisions on record 3,371
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Perry-Dowdell Pittsburgh National
Approval rate 28% 49% 58%
Fully favorable 20% — —
Denials 72% — —

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

Judge Perry-Dowdell
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 Leslie Perry-Dowdell has fluctuated over the years, starting at 41% in 2016 and reaching 28% in the most recent reporting period. With 3,371 decisions on record since 2016, the data indicates a shift in the judge's pattern over the last decade. This recent figure reflects a continuation of the judge's established decision-making pattern.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Perry-Dowdell'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 Pittsburgh hearing office

The Pittsburgh hearing office serves claimants across Pennsylvania and the surrounding region. As of the most recent office on record in July 2026, this location hosts a bench of 13 judges. The office-wide approval rate in the latest period was 49%, which provides context for the local hearing environment.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Pittsburgh

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Pittsburgh hearing office. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 28% to 74% since 2016. Your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.

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