SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Timothy S. Snelling

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Fresno Hearing Office · 5 years on the bench · 11,278 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Snelling?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Snelling maintains a lifetime approval rate of 56% based on 11,278 lifetime decisions. In the latest reporting period, his rate sits 6 points below the Fresno office average of 62%, 3 points below the state average of 59%, and 2 points below the national average of 58%. This data provides a statistical baseline for understanding how cases have been decided in his courtroom over the last 5 years.

Metric Judge Snelling Fresno National
Approval rate 56% 62% 58%
Fully favorable 48%
Denials 44%

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

Judge Snelling
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY20
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 5-year tenure, your judge has shown a variable trend in approval rates. Starting at 49% in 2016, the rate fluctuated before reaching 65% in 2020. This pattern suggests that the approach to evidence and case requirements has evolved over his 11,278 lifetime decisions. The recent uptick in the latest period may reflect changes in case mix or the quality of evidence presented in his courtroom.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Snelling'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 Snelling? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Fresno hearing office

The Fresno Hearing Office serves a significant population across California, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 62% in the latest reporting period. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can visit the Fresno Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The SSA assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Fresno Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 37% to 73%. Because of this variance, the specific judge you draw can influence the procedural flow of your hearing.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

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