Kathleen H. Switzer is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Salt Lake City office. With a 77% lifetime approval rate over 7,792 decisions, their record sits well above the national average of 58%. While these statistics offer a look at past trends, they are not a prediction for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the unique requirements of this judge's courtroom.
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 Switzer's approval rate is measured against the Salt Lake City Hearing Office and national benchmarks to provide context for your upcoming hearing. With a docket of 7,792 lifetime decisions, the data offers a look at historical trends. Currently, her approval rate stands 23 points above the local office average and 19 points above the 58% national average. 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 Switzer'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 5 years on the bench, Judge Switzer has maintained a consistent approval pattern. While yearly rates fluctuated between 74% and 89%, the overall trend remains steady. The most recent reporting period shows a continuation of this pattern, providing a baseline for understanding how your case may be evaluated.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Switzer'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 Switzer? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Salt Lake City hearing office
The Salt Lake City Hearing Office serves a broad population across Utah, managing a high volume of disability claims with a bench of 6 judges. The office-wide latest approval rate of 54% reflects the nature of the cases processed in this region. You can visit the Salt Lake City Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Judge Switzer is essentially random. Across the Salt Lake City Hearing Office, the 6 ALJs range from 28% to 77% in lifetime approval rates, highlighting the importance of your individual case presentation. Regardless of which judge is assigned to your hearing, the fundamental requirements for proving disability remain the same.
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.
