James W. Sherry is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Tacoma WA Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 56% across 3,075 decisions. This sits slightly below the national average of 58%. Because case assignment is random, your specific judge matters. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An experienced 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 Sherry maintains a lifetime approval rate of 56% across 3,075 decisions. When compared to the Tacoma WA Hearing Office latest approval rate of 58%, his recent decisions show a variance of -2 percentage points. These figures offer a statistical view of his tenure, though they do not predict the outcome of your specific 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 Sherry'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 2 years on the bench, Judge Sherry has presided over 3,075 decisions. His yearly trend shows a shift from a 57% approval rate in 2016 to 54% in 2017. This data reflects his established decision-making framework and the evidence presented in the disability claims you are preparing to file.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Sherry'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 Sherry? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the Tacoma WA hearing office
The Tacoma WA Hearing Office serves a broad population across Washington, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an overall latest approval rate of 58%. You can expect a formal environment where the quality of your medical evidence and vocational testimony remains the primary driver of your outcome. You can find more information on the Tacoma WA Hearing Office page.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Tacoma WA Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 31% to 72%. This variation highlights why understanding the specific tendencies of your assigned judge is a standard part of your case preparation.
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.
