Robert Lenzini is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Orange Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 59% across 17,625 lifetime decisions. This rate is slightly above the national average of 58%. While your recent approval rate reached 81%, aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case for this judge's specific bench.
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
Comparing a judge's lifetime performance to recent office and national data provides context for your upcoming hearing. While Judge Lenzini maintains a 59% lifetime approval rate, his most recent reporting period shows an 81% approval rate. This is measured against an Orange Hearing Office average of 62% and a national average of 58%. These figures are derived from a significant docket of 17,625 lifetime decisions.
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 Lenzini'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 9 years on the bench, Judge Lenzini has seen his approval rates fluctuate, moving from 43% in 2017 to 82% in 2025. This trend shows a notable upward trajectory in recent years, particularly following a dip in 2022. The latest data reflects a shift compared to his earlier career averages, suggesting that recent case outcomes have been more favorable than the historical baseline.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lenzini'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 Lenzini? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Orange hearing office
The Orange Hearing Office serves a large population in California, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an office-wide latest approval rate of 62%. You should be prepared for a rigorous review of your medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can visit the Orange 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 your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Across the Orange Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 44% to 59%. While these variations exist, the fundamental requirements for proving your disability remain consistent.
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.
