SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Andrew J. Soltes Jr.

Last decided AlbanySep 2025
Decisions 2,813since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure accuracy. The 55% approval rate for Andrew J. Soltes Jr. reflects his entire record since 2017, which you can compare against the 40% to 81% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is Albany. With 2,813 decisions on record, the data provides a clear view of historical trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 55%
Decisions on record 2,813

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Soltes Jr.. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 26, 2025. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Soltes Jr.
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY25
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 approval rate for Andrew J. Soltes Jr. has shown a varied trajectory across the 2,813 decisions on record since May 2017. After starting at 40% in 2017, the rate trended upward, reaching 66% in 2024 before settling at 60% in 2025. This pattern indicates a shift in decision outcomes over the last several years. The latest period reflects a continuation of this steady pattern, suggesting that the judge's approach has evolved within the context of the Albany office's workload.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Soltes Jr.'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 Albany hearing office

The Albany hearing office serves you across New York and the surrounding region. As of the most recent record in September 2025, this office maintains a bench of 15 judges whose most recent office on record is this one. You can expect a standard hearing process where your evidence quality and medical documentation remain the primary factors in a favorable decision. You can see the Albany Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Albany

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is this one. Approval rates among these peers range from 40% to 81% on their since-2016 records. For your preparation, the guidance remains consistent 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