SSDI Administrative Law Judge

Hon. T. Patrick Hannon

SSDI Administrative Law Judge at the San Jose Hearing Office · 6 years on the bench · 11,865 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled with Judge Hannon?

Free Benefits Review →
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

At the San Jose Hearing Office, Judge Hannon’s approval rate is 3 percentage points higher than the office average and 3 percentage points above the national average. These comparisons are based on the most recent reporting period. With 6 years on the bench, the data offers a look at past decision-making patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Metric Judge Hannon San Jose National
Approval rate 61% 58% 58%
Fully favorable 52%
Denials 39%

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

Judge Hannon
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY21
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over 6 years on the bench, Judge Hannon has seen a shift in approval trends. After starting with a 53% approval rate in 2016, the figures fluctuated before reaching 93% in the final reporting period of 2021. This pattern reflects a change in the volume or nature of cases handled during that time. The latest period shows a departure from earlier, more conservative approval levels.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

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

Free Benefits Review
Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the San Jose hearing office

The San Jose Hearing Office manages a volume of disability claims for the region. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an environment where case processing is handled according to federal standards. The office-wide latest approval rate of 58% aligns with national trends for similar urban jurisdictions. You can see the San Jose 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 essentially random. Across the San Jose Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 48% to 78%. Because you cannot choose your judge, focus on the strength of your medical evidence and testimony. You can find more information on the San Jose Hearing Office page.

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