Bradlee S. Welton is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Oakland Hearing Office, with a lifetime approval rate of 73% over 1,940 lifetime decisions. This sits above the national average of 58%. While this rate is 8 points higher than the Oakland office average, aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case for this judge's specific 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 Welton’s approval rate is higher than regional and national benchmarks. In the latest reporting period, the judge’s approval rate outperformed the Oakland Hearing Office average by 8 percentage points, the state average by 14 points, and the national average by 15 points. These figures are based on a docket of 1,940 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting your specific outcome.
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 Welton'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 2-year tenure, Judge Welton has maintained a stable decision pattern. The approval rate was 74% in 2016 and 73% in 2017, showing minimal variance across reporting periods. This steady trend reflects a consistent approach to case evaluation that remains above the Social Security Administration national median.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Welton'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 Welton? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Oakland hearing office
The Oakland Hearing Office serves a large population in California, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office handles complex cases involving Social Security regulations. The office-wide latest approval rate is 65%. You can visit the Oakland Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases to judges using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning you cannot request a specific judge. At the Oakland Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates across the bench range from 47% to 73%. Because this variance exists, it is common to research your assigned judge, though the guidance for preparing your case remains the same regardless of your assignment.
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.
