SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Curtis R. Boren

Last decided Atlanta NorthSep 2022
Decisions 2,331since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Evaluating a judge's history requires looking at the full scope of their available data. Judge Boren's 53% approval rate on record since 2016 provides a baseline when compared to the 24% to 94% range seen among the 24 judges whose most recent office on record is Atlanta North. Because these figures are based on 2,331 decisions, they offer a look at past trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 53%
Decisions on record 2,331

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Boren. 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 Boren's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Boren
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 approval rate for Judge Boren has fluctuated over the years, beginning at 57% in 2016 and reaching 63% in 2017 before seeing a decline to 44% in 2019. In more recent years, the rate has shown a steady pattern, landing at 54% in 2022. With 2,331 total decisions on record since 2016, these shifts highlight how case mix and evidentiary standards can influence outcomes over time.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Boren'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 Atlanta North hearing office

Curtis R. Boren's most recent SSA record (September 2022) is at the Atlanta North hearing office. This office maintains a bench of 24 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. If you are appearing at this office, you should be prepared for a review of your medical evidence. You can see the Atlanta North Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Atlanta North

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 24 judges whose most recent office on record is Atlanta North, with approval rates ranging from 24% to 94% on their since-2016 records. While the specific judge matters, the fundamental requirements for proving disability remain consistent. You should focus on the evidence in your own file 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