SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Jessica Inouye

Last decided EvanstonJul 2026
Decisions 4,178since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at consistent timeframes. The judge's 45% approval rate on record since 2016 sits within the 45% to 79% range observed among the 15 judges whose most recent office on record is Evanston. In the most recent reporting period, the judge's 44% approval rate compares against the office's 61%, the state's 54%, and the national average of 58%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for your hearing preparation.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 45%
Decisions on record 4,178
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Inouye Evanston National
Approval rate 44% 61% 58%
Fully favorable 30% — —
Denials 56% — —

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

Judge Inouye
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY26
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate (SSA's term: allowance rate) = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total decisions, which exclude dismissals.

Decision pattern

Since 2016, the judge has issued 4,178 decisions with an approval rate of 45%. The yearly trend shows a relatively steady pattern, with annual approval rates fluctuating between 38% and 51% over the last decade. The most recent fiscal year-to-date data shows a 45% approval rate, which remains consistent with the long-term average. This stability suggests that the judge's approach to evaluating evidence has remained predictable over the period covered by our data.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Inouye'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 scheduled?

Free 2 minutes Confidential

About the Evanston hearing office

Jessica Inouye's most recent office on record is the Evanston hearing office, which serves claimants across Illinois. This office maintains a bench of 15 judges, and the office-wide approval rate in the latest reporting period was 61%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Evanston

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 15 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, and 6 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file through July 2026. Approval rates across this bench vary significantly, ranging from 45% to 79% on their since-2016 records.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
baseline approval rate
Unrepresented claimants
WITH A LAWYER
~3×
higher approval rate
Represented claimants

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