Dennis M. Matulewicz maintains a lifetime approval rate of 73% across 24,019 decisions. This sits above the current national average of 58%. While his record is statistically significant, aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare your case to meet the specific standards 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
Comparing a judge's approval rate to regional and national benchmarks offers insight into the local hearing environment. Judge Matulewicz currently maintains an approval rate that is 16 points higher than the Livonia MI office average and 15 points above the national average. These statistics are derived from a substantial docket of 24,019 lifetime decisions. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual 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 Matulewicz'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 8 years on the bench, Judge Matulewicz has demonstrated a fluctuating but generally high approval trend. While his rate was 64% in 2018, recent years have shown an increase, reaching 84% in 2023. This trajectory reflects his approach to evaluating disability claims in the most recent reporting periods.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Matulewicz'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 Matulewicz? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Livonia MI hearing office
The Livonia MI Hearing Office serves a broad population across Michigan, managing a high volume of disability claims. With 6 judges on the bench, the office maintains a collaborative environment to process cases efficiently. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on medical documentation and vocational testimony. You can visit the Livonia MI Hearing Office page to view the full ALJ roster.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Within the Livonia MI office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 54% to 73%. Because case assignment is outside of your control, understanding the office-wide environment is as important as reviewing your specific judge.
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.
