Karen Sayon is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Orland Park Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 43% over 24,153 lifetime decisions. While this rate provides context, case assignment is random and aggregate data does not predict the outcome of your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the 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 Sayon's approval rate is evaluated against both the Orland Park office and national benchmarks. With 24,153 lifetime decisions, her docket provides a significant sample size for understanding her judicial approach. While her latest approval rate of 44% is slightly below the office average of 46%, these figures are historical and do not serve as predictions for your 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 Sayon'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 Sayon has shown a consistent decision pattern. Her annual approval rates have ranged from a low of 35% in 2021 to a high of 49% in 2017. Recent data shows her approval rate at 46% in 2025. This trend suggests a predictable approach to case evaluation, where the quality of your medical evidence remains the primary driver of the outcome.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Sayon'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 Sayon? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Orland Park hearing office
The Orland Park Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Illinois as part of a regional network dedicated to processing disability appeals. With a bench of 6 judges, the office manages a high volume of cases, reflecting the broader demand for disability services in the region. The office-wide latest approval rate of 46% provides a baseline for the local judicial environment.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Orland Park office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 33% to 63%. This variance highlights why understanding the general environment of your hearing office is useful. You can find more details on the Orland Park Hearing Office page.
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.
