Kathleen Mucerino is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Phoenix office. With a lifetime approval rate of 78% over 20,324 lifetime decisions, her record sits above the national average of 58%. While recent data shows an 89% approval rate, these figures represent past decisions, not predictions for your specific hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this judge's 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 performance to broader benchmarks provides context for your upcoming hearing. While the national average approval rate sits at 58%, Judge Mucerino maintains a lifetime rate of 78% based on 20,324 decisions. In the most recent reporting period, her approval rate reached 89%, outpacing both the office average of 56% and the national average of 58%.
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 Mucerino'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 a decade on the bench, Judge Mucerino has demonstrated a consistent approach to disability adjudication. After a period of lower approval rates between 2018 and 2021, her decisions have trended upward, with 87% approval in 2024 and 90% in 2025. This recent shift reflects a period of high allowance frequency.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Mucerino'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 Mucerino? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Phoenix hearing office
The Phoenix Hearing Office serves a large population across Arizona, managing a high volume of disability claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office handles a diverse range of medical and vocational evidence. The office-wide latest approval rate currently sits at 56%. You can visit the Phoenix Hearing Office page for 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 Phoenix Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench vary, ranging from 36% to 78%. Because case assignment is outside of your control, understanding the general environment of the office is more practical than focusing on individual peers.
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.
