SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Eskunder Boyd

SSA Administrative Law Judge at the New Haven Hearing Office · 10 years on the bench · 23,333 lifetime decisions

Hearing scheduled?

Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

Judge Boyd maintains a 57% lifetime approval rate, which provides a baseline for understanding his decision-making history. In the most recent reporting period, his approval rate reached 69%, placing him 5 points above the office average and 11 points above the national average. With over 23,000 decisions rendered, this data offers a statistically significant look at his tenure. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for individual hearings.

Metric Judge Boyd New Haven National
Approval rate 57% 52% 58%
Fully favorable 52%
Denials 31%

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

Judge Boyd
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY25
Source: SSA OHO disposition data. Approval rate = fully favorable + partially favorable decisions divided by total dispositions excluding dismissals.

Decision pattern

Over his 10 years on the bench, Judge Boyd has presided over 23,333 decisions. While his approval rate fluctuated in the mid-50s for much of his career, the data shows a notable upward trend beginning in 2024. This recent shift toward higher approval rates suggests a change in the volume or nature of evidence presented in his courtroom. The latest period reflects a continuation of this recent pattern.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Boyd'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 New Haven hearing office

The New Haven Hearing Office serves you throughout Connecticut, managing a high volume of cases with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 52%, reflecting the complex nature of disability claims in this region. You can expect a formal process focused on medical documentation and vocational testimony. See the New Haven Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration utilizes a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning your assignment to a specific judge is essentially random. Across the New Haven Hearing Office, lifetime approval rates for the bench range from 37% to 57%. Because each judge brings a unique perspective to the evidence, understanding the office-wide environment is helpful. For preparation purposes, the guidance is the same regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Your odds change dramatically 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