SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Michael Werner

Last decided Kansas CityJul 2026
Decisions 2,961since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating an approval rate requires looking at the data in context. You can compare the 39% approval rate on record since 2017 against the 33% to 77% range observed among the 17 judges whose most recent office on record is Kansas City. In the latest reporting period, Michael Werner's 52% approval rate sits 4 percentage points below the office average of 56%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for the local judicial environment.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 39%
Decisions on record 2,961
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Werner Kansas City National
Approval rate 52% 56% 58%
Fully favorable 33% — —
Denials 48% — —

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

Judge Werner
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY18FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since December 2017, the approval rate for Michael Werner has shown a notable evolution. After a period of lower approval rates between 2019 and 2021, the data indicates a consistent upward trend. Specifically, the latest reporting period shows an approval rate of 52%, which is a shift from the 39% average observed over the entire record. This recent uptick reflects changes in the docket as the record has matured.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Werner'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 Kansas City hearing office

The Kansas City hearing office serves you and other claimants across the region. With a bench of 17 judges whose most recent office on record is this location, it handles a high volume of disability claims. The office-wide latest approval rate is 56%, providing a benchmark for the local judicial environment.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Kansas City

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is Kansas City, and 12 of them decided cases there in the latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 33% to 77%.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
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