Robert Iafe is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the San Diego Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 58% across 12,928 decisions. This aligns with the national median of 58%. While San Diego ALJs as a group range from 38% to 68% in their approval rates, case assignment is random. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings. 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
Judge Iafe maintains a lifetime approval rate of 58%, which sits exactly at the national average. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate was 50%, compared to the San Diego Hearing Office average of 57%. These figures are derived from a docket of 12,928 lifetime decisions accumulated over a decade of service. Aggregate rates describe past decisions rather than predicting outcomes for your 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 Iafe'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 his 10 years on the bench, Judge Iafe has seen fluctuations in his annual approval rates, ranging from a high of 69% in 2016 to 50% in 2025. While the rate has moved periodically, the long-term trend reflects his approach to evaluating disability evidence. The recent approval rate of 50% represents a shift from the higher rates seen in 2023, reflecting the most recent reporting cycle.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Iafe'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 Iafe? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the San Diego hearing office
The San Diego Hearing Office serves a large population of claimants across Southern California. It is staffed by 6 ALJs who manage a high volume of disability claims annually. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 57%, which is slightly below the state average of 59%.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to Judge Iafe is essentially random. Within the San Diego Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges vary significantly, spanning from 38% to 68%. Because your judge is assigned by the system rather than by choice, your focus should remain on the strength of your medical evidence.
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.
