Ramona L. Fernandez is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Livonia MI office. Over 10 years on the bench and 21,291 lifetime decisions, she has maintained a 68% approval rate. While her latest period shows a 44% approval rate, aggregate data describes past trends, not predictions for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's 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
Comparing a judge's performance requires looking at both lifetime trends and recent activity. Judge Fernandez has presided over 21,291 lifetime decisions. While her lifetime approval rate stands at 68%, her latest reporting period shows a 44% approval rate, which is 11 points higher than the current office average of 57%. These figures reflect historical trends rather than specific outcomes for your upcoming hearing.
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 Fernandez'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 decade on the bench, the approval pattern for Judge Fernandez has shown notable shifts. After maintaining a steady rate near 68% for several years, the data shows a peak in 2019 at 73% before a period of fluctuation. The most recent reporting period reflects a lower approval rate compared to her long-term average. These variations often stem from changes in the complexity of cases or the specific evidence presented in recent dockets.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Fernandez'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 Fernandez? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Livonia MI hearing office
The Livonia MI Hearing Office serves a significant population of claimants across Michigan. With a bench of six judges, the office manages a high volume of cases to ensure timely processing of disability claims. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 57%, reflecting the broader regional trends in SSDI adjudication.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Within the Livonia MI Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the six judges range from 54% to 73%. Because each judge manages a unique docket, understanding the office-wide environment 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.
