Ilene Sloan is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Seattle Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 34% across 4,150 decisions. This sits below the national average of 58%, though aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. Because case assignment is random, understanding your judge's history is a vital step in preparing your evidence. 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 Sloan maintains a lifetime approval rate of 34%, which provides a statistical baseline for understanding how cases have been decided in her courtroom. When compared to the Seattle Hearing Office latest approval rate of 58%, her history shows a distinct pattern in case outcomes. These figures are derived from 4,150 lifetime decisions made during her tenure. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual 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 Sloan'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 her 4 years on the bench, Judge Sloan has presided over 4,150 lifetime decisions. Her yearly trend shows a 37% approval rate in 2016 and 2017, followed by 32% in 2018 and 13% in 2019. This pattern reflects the evidence and case mix presented in her courtroom relative to Social Security Administration standards.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Sloan'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 Sloan? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Seattle hearing office
The Seattle 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 should expect a professional environment focused on the requirements of 20 CFR Part 404. You can see the Seattle 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 you cannot choose your judge. Within the Seattle Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 27% to 66%. This variance highlights why your specific judge assignment matters for your case strategy. You can review the Seattle Hearing Office page for more information on the local bench.
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.
