SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Robert E. Lowenstein

Last decided Los Angeles DowntownSep 2018
Decisions 720since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

This table compares the approval record of Robert E. Lowenstein against the broader bench at the Los Angeles Downtown hearing office. The data reflects the 720 decisions issued by Robert E. Lowenstein between 2016 and 2018. These figures provide a statistical view of past activity, though aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 78%
Decisions on record 720

Judge Lowenstein is not in SSA's latest disposition file, so there is no 12-month figure. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 28, 2018. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Judge Lowenstein isn't in SSA's latest disposition file, so the judge comparison tool, which compares active judges over the same 12 months, leaves them out.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Lowenstein
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY18
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

Robert E. Lowenstein issued 720 decisions on record between 2016 and 2018. The approval rate was 77% during 2016, 77% in 2017, and 87% in 2018. This data reflects the activity during that specific window, with the final year of the record showing an increase compared to the previous years.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Lowenstein'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 Los Angeles Downtown hearing office

The Los Angeles Downtown hearing office serves you if you are in California and is part of the broader SSA regional network. While 10 judges have their most recent record at this location, the office's active panel consists of the 4 judges who decided cases in the most recent SSA data file. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on the evidence presented in your specific file.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Los Angeles Downtown

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Among the 10 judges whose most recent office on record is Los Angeles Downtown, 4 judges decided cases here in SSA's latest file. These 4 judges have approval rates ranging from 38% to 74% on their records since 2016. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

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