SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Francine A. Serafin

Last decided Charleston WVJul 2026
Decisions 3,318since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same period to ensure accuracy. While Francine A. Serafin has a 46% approval rate on record since 2017, her latest-period approval rate is 55%. This latest figure sits 7 points below the Charleston WV office average of 62% and 3 points below the national average of 58%. These statistics are derived from a significant volume of decisions, providing a stable baseline for understanding past activity.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 46%
Decisions on record 3,318
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Serafin Charleston WV National
Approval rate 55% 62% 58%
Fully favorable 46% — —
Denials 45% — —

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

Judge Serafin
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY18FY26
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 December 2017, Francine A. Serafin has issued 3,318 decisions. Her yearly approval trend has fluctuated, showing a low of 36% in 2023 and a rise to 55% in the 2026 fiscal year to date. This latest period reflects a departure from her long-term average, indicating a shift in recent case outcomes. Understanding this pattern helps you prepare for the variables that may influence your specific hearing.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Serafin'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 Charleston WV hearing office

The Charleston WV hearing office serves you throughout West Virginia and the surrounding region. As of the most recent office on record in July 2026, the office maintains a bench of 9 judges with a latest-period approval rate of 62%. You can expect a formal administrative process where evidence quality is the primary driver of success.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Charleston WV

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you draw is essentially random. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is the Charleston WV office. Approval rates across this bench range from 39% to 78% on their records since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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