John E. Sandbothe is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the West Des Moines office. Over 10 years on the bench and 18,290 lifetime decisions, you will find he has maintained a 68% approval rate. This sits above the national average of 58%. While his recent approval rate is 61%, he remains a consistent presence. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific bench.
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 Sandbothe maintains a lifetime approval rate of 68%, a figure derived from his 10-year tenure and 18,290 lifetime decisions. In the most recent reporting period, his 61% approval rate outperforms both the West Des Moines office average of 55% and the national average of 58%. These metrics describe historical decision-making tendencies rather than individual hearing outcomes.
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 Sandbothe'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 10 years on the bench, Judge Sandbothe has demonstrated a consistent approach to disability claims. His yearly approval trends show stability, with rates fluctuating between 61% and 72% throughout his career. This long-term consistency reflects a steady judicial philosophy applied across his 18,290 lifetime decisions.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Sandbothe'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 Sandbothe? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the West Des Moines hearing office
The West Des Moines hearing office serves a broad population, managing a high volume of SSDI claims with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an average approval rate of 55%, reflecting the complex nature of the cases processed here. You can visit the West Des Moines Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to Judge Sandbothe is essentially random. Within the West Des Moines hearing office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges vary significantly, ranging from 38% to 70%. This variance highlights why focusing on the strength of your own medical evidence is the most reliable strategy.
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.
