Ken H Chau, Norwalk , Pasadena , California , California Odar Office, Administrative Law Judge
For the 2012 *fiscal year, Judge Ken H Chau has disposed 33 cases at the Office of Disability Adjudication and Review (ODAR) in COLUMBIA, MISSOURI. Out of those 33 dispostions, 7 were dismissed, 14 were approved and 12 were denied. This means that the percentage of depositions that Judge Ken H Chau has approved in COLUMBIA for the 2012 fiscal year is 21%. The information below for Judge Ken H Chau was last updated on 10/01/2021.
AVERAGE STATISTICS
| Office | *Fiscal Year | Total Depositions |
Total Decisions |
Total Denials |
Total Awards |
Cases Dismissed |
Cases Approved |
Cases Denied |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| COLUMBIA | 2012 | 33 | 26 | 12 | 14 | 21% | 42% | 36% |
| NORWALK | 2015 | 81 | 60 | 25 | 35 | 26% | 43% | 31% |
| PASADENA | 2015 | 358 | 293 | 105 | 188 | 18% | 53% | 29% |
| COLUMBIA | 2014 | 547 | 447 | 187 | 260 | 18% | 48% | 34% |
| NORWALK | 2014 | 26 | 17 | 13 | 4 | 35% | 15% | 50% |
| COLUMBIA | 2013 | 568 | 454 | 200 | 254 | 20% | 45% | 35% |
| PASADENA | 2016 | 338 | 286 | 132 | 154 | 15% | 46% | 39% |
| PASADENA | 2017 | 245 | 187 | 69 | 118 | 24% | 48% | 28% |
| PASADENA | 2018 | 103 | 81 | 42 | 39 | 21% | 38% | 41% |
| PASADENA | 2019 | 298 | 238 | 105 | 133 | 20% | 45% | 35% |
| PASADENA | 2020 | 190 | 151 | 53 | 98 | 21% | 52% | 28% |
AVERAGE TIME
| Dismissed | Approved | Denied | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ken H Chau | No Stats for FY2020 | ||
| All ALJs in COLUMBIA | 19% | 37% | 44% |
| All ALJs in MISSOURI | 19% | 38% | 42% |
| All ALJs in the Nation | 18% | 45% | 38% |
4 Comments
What was said during the appeal testimony was no where near what was on the “decision” that was mailed to me. My attorney thought it went well and thought I’d be approved. When he received the “decision” he withdrew from my case. He knew this was a no win situation. I have had problems with a federal agency “they committed fraud” and many other infractions and the judge in that case wouldn’t let me speak, wouldn’t let my federal public defender object to the inconsistencies in her responses and left out and added things that never happened. This was 6 yrs ago, do you think that this has anything to do with the the “decision ” on my SSDI? You bet it does. The slander from the first case seemed to be verbatim in my second case. Why would they do this? Because they can and they covered the fraud, harassment, slanderous, threats, intimidation. They will cover up corruption and blatantly do it without wanting the truth. They dont care about the truth and they will make sure that anything I need from a federal anything, I will not get. They are their own law. That is not Constitutional and that is not how our democracy should be. They need to take responsibility for their actions, not find judges that will cover for them.
Denied because he lied. The “impartial vocational expert” was disconnected just after sworn in. And yet, her “testimony” was the exact “verbage” as judges. Which was the reason I was denied. And we aren’t allowed to voice record our “hearings” for our protection. Now i know why, so they can lie if we recorded our “hearings” they would have to do their job and not waiver the truth. Democracy? I think not.
RACIST! discriminating! Denied me because im white. Called me a liar! Absolute unfair!
Very professional.