SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Jeffrey J. Schueler

Last decided RoanokeJul 2026
Decisions 2,323since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. The 53% approval rate since 2016 sits within the 41% to 66% range of the Roanoke bench's since-2016 records. In the most recent reporting period, the 68% approval rate outperformed the office rate of 54%, the state rate of 49%, and the national rate of 58%. These figures provide context for the decision-making history at this office.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 53%
Decisions on record 2,323
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Schueler Roanoke National
Approval rate 68% 54% 58%
Fully favorable 37% — —
Denials 32% — —

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 Schueler's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Schueler
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

The approval rate has shown a varied trend across the 2,323 decisions on record since 2016. After fluctuating in the late 2010s, the rate reached 61% in 2020 before declining to 42% in 2022. Recent years have shown a recovery, with the latest period reflecting a 68% approval rate. This recent performance suggests a shift from the long-term average, which may reflect changes in case mix or evidence quality.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Schueler'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 Roanoke hearing office

Jeffrey J. Schueler's most recent office on record is the Roanoke Hearing Office, which serves claimants across Virginia. This office maintains a bench of 5 judges who handle disability claims. You can expect a standard hearing process focused on medical and vocational evidence. You can visit the Roanoke Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Roanoke

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 5 judges whose most recent office on record is this one. Approval rates across this bench vary, ranging from 41% to 66% on their since-2016 records. You should prepare for your hearing based on the merits of your claim regardless of which judge is 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