Rhonda S. Greenberg is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Tampa Hearing Office. Your judge has a lifetime approval rate of 57% across 2,777 decisions. These figures represent past performance and do not predict the outcome of your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of your hearing.
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 Greenberg maintains a lifetime approval rate of 57%, which is closely aligned with the 58% national average and the 58% Tampa office average. This statistical baseline is derived from 2,777 lifetime decisions made during her 3-year tenure. Comparing these figures helps you understand the environment of your upcoming hearing. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual 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 Greenberg'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 her 3 years on the bench, Judge Greenberg has shown a variable decision pattern. Her approval rate fluctuated from 49% in 2016 to a peak of 68% in 2017, before adjusting to 33% in the most recent reporting period. These shifts often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the specific evidence presented during those years. This trend highlights the importance of presenting a robust medical record.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Greenberg'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 Greenberg? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Tampa hearing office
The Tampa Hearing Office serves a large population across the region, managing a high volume of disability claims with a bench of 6 judges. The office maintains an approval rate of 58%, consistent with national trends for Social Security Disability Insurance. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on your medical documentation and vocational testimony. See the Tampa Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Judge Greenberg is essentially random. Within the Tampa Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 48% to 70%. This variance underscores why you should focus on the strength of your own medical evidence rather than the specific judge assigned.
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.
