SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Jan Leventer

Last decided QueensJul 2026
Decisions 4,173since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing Jan Leventer's approval rates to broader benchmarks provides context for how decisions are distributed at the Queens Hearing Office. Over the 12 months to July 31, 2026, the 94% approval rate is measured against the office rate of 76%, the state rate of 63%, and the national rate of 58%. These figures are derived from a docket of 414 decisions during this period.

Last 12 months July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Leventer Queens National
Approval rate 94% 76% 58%
Fully favorable 91% — —
Denials 6% — —
Decisions 414 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 85%
Decisions on record 4,173

SSA publishes no office- or national-level breakdown of fully favorable and denial rates. The 12 months are SSA's figures for this fiscal year to date plus the rest of the previous fiscal year; how we calculate them.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Leventer's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Leventer
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 January 2016, Jan Leventer has issued 4,173 decisions. The yearly approval trend shows fluctuations, with rates reaching 94% in the most recent 12-month window. This performance sits above the overall record of 85% since 2016.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Leventer'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 Queens hearing office

The Queens Hearing Office is the most recent office on record for Jan Leventer, with activity documented through July 2026. The bench consists of 12 judges whose most recent record is here, and the office maintained a 76% approval rate over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Queens

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning the judge assigned to your hearing is essentially random. Among the 6 judges who decided cases at this office in SSA's latest file, approval rates range from 62% to 94% over the 12 months to July 31, 2026.

Judges with similar approval rates

These active judges' approval rates over the same 12 months (July 26, 2025 – July 31, 2026) are closest to Judge Leventer's 94%. One of them last decided cases in New York. With too few close matches there, the rest come from other regions.

Rates within 5 points of each other are hard to tell apart at a typical caseload, so treat these as judges with comparable records, not a ranking. See Judge Leventer and the three closest side by side →

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