SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Elizabeth Ebner

Position Administrative Law Judge
On record SSA records since 2016
Decisions 2,588 lifetime

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review
Free
2 minutes
Confidential

Approval rates

The approval rate for Elizabeth Ebner is based on 2,588 lifetime decisions recorded since 2016. Within the NHC Falls Church hearing office, lifetime approval rates among the 14 judges on record range from 29% to 80%. These figures offer a broad view of the office's decision-making landscape, though they describe past trends rather than predictions for your individual hearing.

Lifetime SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 60%
Decisions on record 2,588

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Ebner. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 26, 2025. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Ebner
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

Since 2016, the approval rate for Elizabeth Ebner has varied, moving from 43% in her early recorded period to 68% in 2025. This fluctuation reflects the complexity of the cases heard at the NHC Falls Church office. While the rate has shifted over the years, the volume of 2,588 lifetime decisions provides a stable baseline for understanding her judicial record. Recent data suggests a consistent engagement with the evidence presented in each unique case.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Ebner'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 NHC Falls Church hearing office

The NHC Falls Church hearing office serves claimants throughout the District of Columbia region. This office maintains a bench of 14 judges on record, ensuring that cases are processed through a standardized administrative system. You can expect a formal hearing environment where the quality of your medical evidence remains the primary driver of the outcome. You can visit the NHC Falls Church Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges at this hearing office

The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Elizabeth Ebner is essentially random. Across the NHC Falls Church bench, there are 14 judges on record since 2016, with lifetime approval rates spanning from 29% to 80%. This variance highlights why focusing on your own medical documentation is essential, as the guidance for your preparation remains the same 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