Douglas Cohen is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Seven Fields office. With a lifetime approval rate of 60% over 20,611 decisions, he sits slightly above the national average of 58%. While his latest approval rate of 69% is 11 points below the office average, case assignment is random and rates vary across the bench. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific bench.
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 Cohen maintains a lifetime approval rate of 60% based on 20,611 decisions rendered over a decade on the bench. In the most recent reporting period, this rate reached 69%, placing the judge 2 points above the national average of 58% and 5 points above the state average of 55%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding historical trends at the Seven Fields office.
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 Cohen'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 10 years of service, Judge Cohen has shown an upward trend in approval rates. After a period of fluctuation between 2016 and 2020, the approval rate has climbed from 59% in 2021 to 70% in 2025. This recent stability reflects a consistent approach to case evaluation that has moved closer to the office-wide benchmarks.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Cohen'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 Cohen? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Seven Fields hearing office
The Seven Fields Hearing Office serves you and other claimants across Pennsylvania and the surrounding region. It is staffed by 6 ALJs who handle a high volume of disability claims. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 71%. You can visit the Seven Fields 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 your assignment is effectively random. The Seven Fields Hearing Office features a bench with lifetime approval rates ranging from 54% to 71%. Because each judge manages their courtroom differently, understanding the office-wide context is helpful for your 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.
