SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Christopher P. Grovich

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the Seven Fields Hearing Office · 9 years on the bench · 16,904 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Grovich?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

In the latest reporting period, Judge Grovich maintained an approval rate of 77%, which is 19 percentage points higher than the national average of 58%. With a docket spanning 9 years on the bench, his performance provides a baseline for understanding local outcomes. Comparing these figures to the Seven Fields Hearing Office average of 71% helps illustrate how his decisions align with regional trends.

Metric Judge Grovich Seven Fields National
Approval rate 71% 71% 58%
Fully favorable 68%
Denials 23%

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 Grovich's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Grovich
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 9-year tenure, Judge Grovich has presided over 16,904 lifetime decisions, showing a trend that has shifted from a 61% approval rate in 2019 to a 79% approval rate in 2025. This upward trajectory reflects his evolution in case evaluation. The most recent data indicates that his current approval patterns remain robust compared to his earlier years on the bench.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Grovich'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 Grovich? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Seven Fields hearing office

The Seven Fields Hearing Office serves a wide region in Pennsylvania, managing a high volume of disability claims with a team of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an office-wide approval rate of 71%. You can expect a formal process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Seven Fields Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Across the Seven Fields Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 54% to 71%. Because of this variance, understanding the broader office environment is as important as looking at any single judge.

Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer

SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own

WITHOUT A LAWYER
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants
Free Benefits Review

Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.

Frequently asked questions