T. Patrick Hannon is an ALJ at the San Jose Hearing Office. With a lifetime approval rate of 61% over 11,865 decisions, he sits above the national average of 58%. While these figures provide a statistical baseline, they represent past outcomes rather than predictions for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the unique 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
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.
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.
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 ReviewAbout 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
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
