SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. William G. Reamon

Last decided Grand RapidsJul 2026
Decisions 4,566since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates provides context for how a judge's decisions align with broader office, state, and national trends over the same 12-month window. William G. Reamon's 44% approval rate is based on 427 decisions. These figures are measured against the 60% office rate, 60% state rate, and 58% national rate for the period ending July 31, 2026.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Reamon Grand Rapids National
Approval rate 44% 60% 58%
Fully favorable 32% — —
Denials 56% — —
Decisions 427 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 45%
Decisions on record 4,566

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

Judge Reamon
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 January 2016, William G. Reamon has issued 4,566 decisions on record. His yearly approval rates have fluctuated, showing a peak of 52% in 2017 and a low of 40% in 2018 and 2022. The most recent 12 months show a 44% approval rate, which sits near his 45% approval rate on record since 2016.

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 scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Grand Rapids hearing office

The Grand Rapids hearing office is the most recent office on record for 10 judges as of July 2026. The office maintained a 60% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026. You can expect a standard administrative hearing process at this location.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Grand Rapids

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your judge is assigned randomly. Among the 10 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, 6 judges decided cases here in SSA's latest file. These 6 judges range from 40% to 73% in their approval rates over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

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 Reamon's 44%. All five last decided cases in Michigan.

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 Reamon 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