Charles Walters maintains an 88% lifetime approval rate across 23,773 decisions, higher than the 58% national average. At the Dallas North OHO, this rate sits 23 points above the office average. While these statistics provide a helpful probability, 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
In the most recent reporting period, Walters maintained an 83% approval rate, which is 23 percentage points higher than the Dallas North OHO average of 65%. When compared to the national average of 58%, this judge's recent activity shows a higher frequency of favorable outcomes. These figures are derived from a career docket of 23,773 lifetime decisions. 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 Walters'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 a 10-year tenure, Walters has demonstrated a consistent pattern of high approval rates. While the data shows a shift in the 2021 and 2022 periods, the most recent years indicate a return to higher approval levels, with an 83% rate in 2025. This trend suggests that your outcome remains focused on the specific evidence you present in your case.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Walters'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 Walters? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Dallas North Oho hearing office
The Dallas North OHO serves a large population across Texas, managing a high volume of disability hearings. With an office-wide latest approval rate of 65%, it operates as a critical hub for regional SSDI claims. You can expect a professional environment where your evidence quality is the primary driver of your hearing outcome. See the Dallas North OHO 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 the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Dallas North OHO, lifetime approval rates among the 5 judges range from 24% to 88%. Because of this variance, understanding the tendencies of your assigned judge is a standard part of your case preparation.
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.
