SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Christopher Ambrose

Last decided LansingJul 2026
Decisions 3,854since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

The approval rates for Christopher Ambrose reflect a significant volume of work, with 3,854 decisions on record since 2016. When comparing his latest-period approval rate of 83% against the Lansing office's latest-period rate of 53%, he is 30 percentage points higher. These figures provide a snapshot of his recent decision-making activity compared to his peers. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 68%
Decisions on record 3,854
Latest SSA reporting period July 31, 2026
Metric Judge Ambrose Lansing National
Approval rate 83% 53% 58%
Fully favorable 79% — —
Denials 17% — —

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

Judge Ambrose
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

Since 2016, Christopher Ambrose has maintained a varied approval pattern across 3,854 decisions. After a period of fluctuation between 2020 and 2023, the data shows an upward trend in approvals starting in 2024. The latest reporting period shows an 83% approval rate, which is higher than your long-term average. This recent shift may reflect changes in case mix or evidence quality presented in the most recent fiscal year.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Ambrose'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 Lansing hearing office

The Lansing hearing office serves you throughout Michigan and is part of a broader regional network. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is this one, and the office-wide latest-period approval rate is 53%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on medical evidence and vocational testimony. You can see the Lansing Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Lansing

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 9 judges whose most recent office on record is the Lansing office, and 5 of them decided cases here in the latest file from July 2026. Approval rates for this bench range from 37% to 68% on their since-2016 records. 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