SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Susan J. Soddy

Last decided Houston-BissonnetSep 2016
Decisions 334since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure accuracy. The 8% approval rate for Susan J. Soddy reflects her total decisions on record since 2016, which we compare against the 8% to 73% range observed among the 14 judges whose most recent office on record is the Houston-Bissonnet hearing office. This docket size provides a foundation for understanding past patterns, though aggregate rates do not predict outcomes for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 8%
Decisions on record 334

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Soddy. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2016. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Soddy's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Soddy
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16
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

The 334 decisions on record for Susan J. Soddy since 2016 show a consistent pattern within the observed data window. Because this record is limited to the period ending in September 2016, the data reflects a specific snapshot of activity at the Houston-Bissonnet office. The approval rate of 8% remained steady throughout this period. This pattern provides a baseline for understanding how past cases were handled, though your outcome depends on the specific medical evidence and vocational factors you present.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Soddy'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 Houston-Bissonnet hearing office

The Houston-Bissonnet hearing office serves you in the Texas region. This office features a bench of 14 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a standard hearing process where your medical documentation and vocational testimony are central to the decision. You can see the Houston-Bissonnet Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Houston-Bissonnet

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 14 judges whose most recent office on record is the Houston-Bissonnet hearing office. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 8% to 73% on their since-2016 records. 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