SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Trevor Skarda

On record 3,947 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same period to ensure accuracy. While Trevor Skarda has a 57% lifetime approval rate, his latest-period performance shows a 69% approval rate, which sits 25 points above the Stockton office's latest-period average of 44%. These figures are derived from a significant volume of cases, providing a stable statistical baseline. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 57%
Decisions on record 3,947
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Skarda Stockton National
Approval rate 69% 44% 58%
Fully favorable 57%
Denials 31%

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

Judge Skarda
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 2016, the record for Trevor Skarda shows a clear evolution in his decision-making pattern. After a period of lower approval rates between 2018 and 2022, the data indicates a recent upward trend in approvals, reaching 69% in the latest reporting period. This shift suggests that recent cases have seen a higher rate of favorable outcomes compared to his earlier years on the bench. The latest period reflects a continuation of this steady pattern of rising approval rates.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Skarda'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 Stockton hearing office

The Stockton hearing office serves you throughout California and is a key hub for regional disability adjudications. With a bench of 11 judges on record, the office maintains an environment where case outcomes can vary based on the specific evidence you present. You can expect a formal hearing process focused on your medical documentation and vocational testimony. You can see the Stockton Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

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. There are 11 judges on record at this office since 2016, 4 of whom reported in the SSA's latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 23% to 82% over their respective careers. The guidance for your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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