Brenton L. Rogozen is an ALJ at the San Jose Hearing Office with a lifetime approval rate of 51%. Because case assignment is random, your outcome depends on the evidence you present. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for this judge's specific 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
Judge Rogozen maintains a lifetime approval rate of 51% based on 10,331 lifetime decisions. Compared to the latest reporting period, his approval rate sits 7 percentage points below the San Jose Hearing Office average of 58%. These figures are derived from a significant volume of cases, providing a look at his historical decision-making. 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 Rogozen'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 4-year tenure, Judge Rogozen has maintained a consistent decision pattern. His annual approval rates have hovered between 50% and 51% since 2016. This consistency suggests a stable approach to evaluating your disability claim. The latest reporting period reflects a continuation of this steady pattern, indicating that his methodology remains predictable as you prepare your evidence.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Rogozen'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 Rogozen? See if a free benefits review fits your case.
Check My BenefitsAbout the San Jose hearing office
The San Jose Hearing Office serves a large population across California, managing a high volume of SSDI and SSI claims. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 58%. You should expect a professional environment focused on the medical and vocational evidence presented in your file. You can view the full ALJ roster on the San Jose Hearing Office page.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning you cannot choose your judge. Within the San Jose Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates among the bench range from 48% to 78%. Because this variance exists, the specific judge you are assigned can influence the context of your hearing. You can find more information on the San Jose Hearing Office page.
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.
