William G. Reamon has a lifetime approval rate of 45% across 25,747 decisions. This is below the national average of 58%. Over 10 years on the bench, their decision patterns have remained steady, though recent periods show a 43% approval rate. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's courtroom.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Judge Reamon has presided over 25,747 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, your judge's approval rate was 43%, which is 13 percentage points lower than the national average of 58%. These figures highlight the variance in outcomes across different courtrooms. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Reamon's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over his 10-year tenure, Judge Reamon's approval rates have shown fluctuations, peaking at 52% in 2017 before settling into a range between 39% and 46% in recent years. The latest period shows a 43% approval rate, which remains consistent with his established career trajectory. This pattern suggests a stable approach to evidence evaluation.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Reamon'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 with Judge Reamon? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Grand Rapids hearing office
The Grand Rapids hearing office serves you throughout Michigan and is part of a regional network dedicated to processing disability appeals. The office manages a high volume of cases with a bench of 6 judges, maintaining an office-wide approval rate of 58%. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Grand Rapids office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 43% to 66%. Because of this variance, it is helpful to understand the general environment of your assigned office.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
