SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Michele Stolls

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 3,951 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Comparing a judge's performance requires looking at consistent data periods. While Michele Stolls has a 56% lifetime approval rate, her latest-period approval rate is 44%, which sits 1 point below the Wilkes Barre office average of 45%. These figures are derived from 3,951 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 56%
Decisions on record 3,951
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Stolls Wilkes Barre National
Approval rate 44% 45% 58%
Fully favorable 40%
Denials 56%

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

Judge Stolls
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Michele Stolls has presided over 3,951 decisions since 2016. Her yearly approval trend shows a period of higher activity in the late 2010s, followed by a transition to a more moderate approval range in recent years. While the latest-period approval rate of 44% shows a shift compared to her historical average, it remains within the broader context of her career record. This pattern reflects the ongoing evolution of her caseload and the specific evidence presented in recent hearings.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Stolls'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 Wilkes Barre hearing office

The Wilkes Barre hearing office serves you and other claimants across the region, maintaining a bench of 13 judges on record. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 45%, providing a benchmark for the local judicial environment. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Wilkes Barre Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to Michele Stolls is essentially random. There are 13 judges on record at this office since 2016, 11 of whom reported in the latest period. The lifetime approval rates for this bench range from 27% to 57%, highlighting the variance you might encounter.

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