SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Dean Syrjanen

Last decided MilwaukeeJul 2026
Decisions 2,382since 2017

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe. While your judge's overall approval rate since 2017 is 43%, recent performance metrics provide a different snapshot. In the latest reporting period, your judge's approval rate was 44%, compared to the Milwaukee office rate of 51%, the Wisconsin state rate of 56%, and the national rate of 58%. These figures rely on a significant volume of decisions to provide statistical context.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2017
Approval rate 43%
Decisions on record 2,382
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Syrjanen Milwaukee National
Approval rate 44% 51% 58%
Fully favorable 35% — —
Denials 56% — —

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

Judge Syrjanen
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY18FY26
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 for Dean Syrjanen has fluctuated across the 2,382 decisions on record since 2017. After an approval rate of 50% in 2018, the rate shifted to 35% in 2019 and 38% in 2020 and 2021. The rate then rose to 49% in 2022, 52% in 2023, and 50% in 2024, before reaching 47% in 2025 and 44% in 2026. This trend reflects the variation in your judge's decision-making over time.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Syrjanen'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 Milwaukee hearing office

The Milwaukee hearing office serves claimants across Wisconsin. As of the most recent office on record in July 2026, the office maintains a bench of 13 judges with varying approval patterns. You can expect a standard administrative process focused on the medical and vocational evidence of your claim.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Milwaukee

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your judge is assigned randomly. There are 13 judges whose most recent office on record is the Milwaukee hearing office. Approval rates for these judges range from 27% to 56% on their respective records. Your preparation remains consistent regardless of which judge is assigned to your case.

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