SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Jesse J. Pease

Last decided RenoJul 2026
Decisions 2,827since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure an accurate picture. Between October 1, 2025 and July 31, 2026, Jesse J. Pease decided 24 cases, while the Reno office saw a 68% approval rate. These figures provide a snapshot of recent activity based on a limited number of decisions.

Last 12 months October 1, 2025 – July 31, 2026 · record starts this fiscal year
Metric Judge Pease Reno National
Approval rate 67% 68% 58%
Fully favorable 58% — —
Denials 33% — —
Decisions 24 — —
All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 63%
Decisions on record 2,827

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.

Judge Pease made fewer than 100 decisions in the last 12 months, too few for a fair side-by-side, so the judge comparison tool leaves them out.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Pease
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, Jesse J. Pease has issued 2,827 decisions on record. The yearly approval trend has fluctuated, starting at 56% in 2016 and reaching 67% in the partial 2026 fiscal year. While the rate dipped to 62% in 2022, the most recent window shows a return to higher approval levels. The most recent 12-month window sits above the 63% approval rate recorded since 2016.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Pease'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 Reno hearing office

The Reno hearing office serves you across Nevada and parts of the surrounding region. As of the most recent data from July 2026, this office remains a central hub for disability hearings in the area. The office recorded a 68% approval rate over the 12 months ending July 31, 2026.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Reno

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. Among the 3 judges who decided cases here in SSA's latest file, approval rates range from 59% to 70% over the 12-month window. There are 7 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, though only 3 of them decided cases here in SSA's latest file.

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