SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Richard Thrasher

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 1,445 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

The approval rates for Richard Thrasher are based on 1,445 lifetime decisions, providing a clear view of how this judge has handled cases since 2016. When comparing these figures, it is important to look at the office-wide lifetime range of 26% to 68% to understand where this judge sits relative to peers. In the most recent reporting period, the 86% approval rate stands 34 points above the Minneapolis office average of 52%. These figures reflect historical trends rather than a guarantee of your outcome.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 63%
Decisions on record 1,445
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Thrasher Minneapolis National
Approval rate 86% 52% 58%
Fully favorable 83%
Denials 14%

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

Judge Thrasher
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

Since 2016, Richard Thrasher has maintained a record of decisions that shows an upward trend in recent years. While the lifetime approval rate sits at 63%, the most recent data indicates a higher frequency of favorable outcomes compared to earlier years in the record. This shift suggests that the approach to evidence and case evaluation has evolved over the last decade. The latest period reflects a continuation of this recent pattern.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Thrasher'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 Minneapolis hearing office

The Minneapolis hearing office serves you throughout Minnesota and the surrounding region. With 16 judges on record, the office handles a diverse range of disability claims with an office-wide latest-period approval rate of 52%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Minneapolis Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

SSA assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 16 judges on record at this office since 2016, 9 of whom reported in SSA's latest period. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 26% to 68% over their respective lifetimes. You can expect the same standard of review regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.

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