SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Cynthia D. Rosa

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 2,083 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's record requires looking at the broader context of their hearing office. The Portland OR office features a bench of 12 judges with lifetime approval rates ranging from 34% to 66%. Comparing an individual judge's performance against this office-wide range provides a clearer picture of the local environment than national averages alone. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 34%
Decisions on record 2,083

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Rosa. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2022. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Rosa
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY22
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

The record for Cynthia D. Rosa spans from 2016 to 2022, covering 2,083 lifetime decisions. Her approval rate showed a downward trend in the earlier years of this window, moving from 49% in 2016 to a more consistent level of 28% in the final three years of the data. This shift suggests a stabilization in her decision-making pattern over time. The recent data reflects a continuation of this steady pattern.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Rosa'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 Portland OR hearing office

The Portland OR hearing office serves you throughout the region, maintaining a bench of 12 judges who manage a high volume of disability cases. The office-wide latest-period approval rate is 64%, reflecting the local administrative environment. You can expect a formal hearing process where evidence quality is the primary factor in the outcome. See the Portland OR Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases using a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. There are 12 judges on record at this office since 2016, 6 of whom are reported in the latest SSA period. Approval rates vary significantly across this bench, with lifetime figures spanning from 34% to 66%. You can find more information on the Portland OR hearing office page.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
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