SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Emily Cameron Shattil

On record 284 decisions since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Emily Cameron Shattil maintains an 83% lifetime approval rate, which sits at the high end of the 29% to 83% range observed among the 11 judges on record at the Omaha office. These figures are derived from 284 lifetime decisions, providing a clear view of historical trends. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 83%
Decisions on record 284

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Shattil. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 30, 2016. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

Year-over-year approval rate across Judge Shattil's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.

Judge Shattil
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16
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 record for Emily Cameron Shattil covers the period starting in 2016, during which 284 lifetime decisions were issued. The approval trend has remained steady throughout this window, reflecting a consistent approach to the evidence presented in your disability claim. Because this data reflects a specific historical period, it serves as a baseline for understanding how cases have been handled in this courtroom. The pattern suggests a stable decision-making process that prioritizes the evidentiary requirements of your file.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Shattil'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 Omaha hearing office

The Omaha hearing office serves you and other claimants throughout Nebraska and surrounding areas. With 11 judges on record since 2016, this office manages a diverse caseload of disability applications. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on your medical documentation and vocational testimony. You can see the /disability-benefits/hearing-offices/omaha-NE 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. There are 11 judges on record at this office since 2016, with lifetime approval rates varying significantly from 29% to 83%. This variance underscores why understanding the bench is useful for your preparation. The guidance for your case remains consistent regardless of which judge you are assigned.

Approval rates change 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