SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Gina Pesaresi

Last decided Jersey CityApr 2024
Decisions 2,068since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at the same timeframes to ensure accuracy. The 61% approval rate for Gina Pesaresi reflects her entire record since 2016, which we compare against the 44% to 79% range of other judges whose most recent office on record is the same. This docket size provides a stable view of her historical decision-making patterns. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 61%
Decisions on record 2,068

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Pesaresi. The most recent period with decisions on record is April 26, 2024. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Pesaresi
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY17FY24
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 December 2016, Gina Pesaresi has issued 2,068 decisions. Her yearly approval trend has remained relatively steady, though it saw a notable increase in 2023 at 74% before adjusting to 64% in 2024. These fluctuations are common in SSDI dockets and often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of medical evidence presented. The recent data indicates a return toward her long-term average after the 2023 peak.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Pesaresi'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 Jersey City hearing office

The Jersey City hearing office serves claimants across New Jersey. With 11 judges on record, the office maintains a collaborative environment where each judge manages a distinct docket. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on medical documentation and vocational testimony. You can see the Jersey City Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Jersey City

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. At the Jersey City hearing office, there are 11 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. These judges show a wide variance in approval rates, ranging from 44% to 79% 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