Hopefully, he'll be remanded to another ALJ.

The type of lawsuit that could do something about an ALJ could take years. Someone needs to do something about both ends of the spectrum--those that approve too many, and those that approve too few. It's just seems like that's a huge undertaking for someone that's struggling already...

On a forum at another website, a former ALJ clerk that wrote the decisions, performed much of the fact checking, and whose opinion was even factored into approvals and denials, wasn't even familiar with the grid rules. How scary is that??? And she bragged that the way she vaguely wrote them, meant they were upheld by the Appeal's Council. Mama Mia!

Bret obviously pulled the short straw with regards to getting this ALJ. None of us can say that an unbiased ALJ would have approved him though.

Bret, if you don't mind my asking, did the Vocational Expert testify that you were unable to perform any prior work (step 4) as well as any type of work (step 5)?

Using a strictly statistical analysis, without reading any files or reviewing any evidence, I agree that a 7% approval rate is as out of the norm as a 7% denial rate.

But then again, ALJ's are paid to apply their own interpretation of the law and regulation, so perhaps the problem is that all ALJ's have judicial independence.

Now DDS employees may deny more cases than they approve, but I am willing to bet that their decisions are more unified, more cohesive, more consistent, across the board; that a DDS analyst in one city would probably make the same decision as a DDS analyst in another city, given the same evidence. At least there would be fewer what is referred to as 'outlier' analysts like there are 'outlier' ALJ's.

At my first hearing they had a vocational expert, because a theryipist made a mistake on hear report, the expert did say I could do sit and stand work, when it went to the appeals council they orderd the judge to have the theryipist clairify her report. The appeals council also orderd the judge to send me to a independent medical exam. The doctor saw me for no more than 4 min. and never even new about my two back surgery's I had, and stated I could do almost anything. We never saw the doctors report until 45 min. before the hearing, so my lawyer stated in his last brief to have it thrown out because he could'nt even cross examine the doctor if he wanted to. They had a vocational expert at my last hearing who stated I could work with the doctor they hired, and that I could not work with my treating doctors rfc's and the report from the theryipist. There is more I just can't think right now, thank you for your insite.

What I would recommend is to see at LEAST one specialist and if they're supportive of filing for SSDI, then request to have them do a new RFC as well. I know this can be expensive, but even seeing a GP at a clinic with sliding scale fees would be better than nothing. Did you ever attempt the Voc Rehab route? They will send you to their docs for evaluations.

*admin edit*

*admin edit*

We can agree to disagree. Jankie volunteers lots of free time here, *edit* and has been an incredible resource to countless posters over the years. *edit* Poster's that have already been approved, or an amazing resource like a former SS employee, try and provide answers even though it is often a thankless way to spend one's time.

Janke's postings, without question, helped me successfully prepare for my ALJ hearing. I sometimes advise new applicants to read through her posting history.

You think Bret should proceed with a lawsuit claiming the ALJ is biased, that likely has odds of less than 7%, and would take years. That makes zero sense. You don't attempt to throw a hail Mary pass, until it's your last possible option. And should he be remanded to another ALJ that does have an unexceptional denial rating, he could negatively influence him or her by going after their colleague.

The case in Queens is one example. It's comparable to winning the lottery statistically.

*admin edit*

I am not a retired ALJ. I don't agree with everything that is posted by everyone else here and give a different point of view. I do know that many people do not agree with me and I don't agree with many of them. I do try (not always successful) to not make personal attacks, but I do understand that many people are just looking for validation so they feel personally attacked because I disagree.

I think that an ALJ who approves only 7% is as wrong as an ALJ who only denies 7%.

Although I do not believe and never will believe that everyone who applies is truly disabled, I also believe in due process and the right for anyone to apply and go through the appeal process. I wish it wasn't as long as it is, but unless Congress increases the staffing budget, it will not get faster.

I am not commenting on the merits of any claim filed by anyone on this forum. I don't know enough about the details; I can't read the file.

THE RIGHT TO APPEAL, do you realize the years I have been fighting this on appeal?????? Just because this judge wrongfuly denied me the first time. And this should just be let go so he can do the same to countless others. thank you for your post.

You seem to forget, the question or issue was not about you, it was about bias aljs, and what to do, you came off like you were defending them. To say they don't make bias decisions is ludicrous, for once with the case in Queens,Ny and congressional hearings there is questions why one alj approves 68 percent while another approves 34 percent, last time I checked 1+1 doesn't equal 4

Reread Janke's posts. She didn't make the posts about her--you did. She then responded.

I understand that there are many emotions tied into this, but trying to lead Bret off on a crusade, is likely not in his best interest.

And I have to just say, a former ALJ posting on this forum, would be an incredible asset if they dedicated themselves in the same way Janke has to helping people in this forum over the years.