Loranzo Fleming is an ALJ at the Atlanta North hearing office. Over 4 years on the bench and 3,902 lifetime decisions, Loranzo Fleming has maintained a 39% approval rate. This sits below the national average of 58%, though aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An experienced attorney can help you prepare your case for this specific judge.
This page presents publicly available SSA Office of Hearings Operations disposition data, with no editorial rating or evaluation. ALJs are independent decisionmakers; aggregate statistics describe past patterns, not predictions of how any individual case will be decided. Information here is provided for hearing preparation, not as legal advice.
Approval rates
Loranzo Fleming has presided over 3,902 lifetime decisions during his 4 years on the bench. His lifetime approval rate of 39% is evaluated against the latest Atlanta North office average of 49% and the national average of 58%. These figures provide a statistical baseline for understanding how he has historically approached disability claims. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.
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 Fleming's docket. Annual rates fluctuate with the mix of cases SSA assigns; the longer-run pattern is more informative than any single year.
Decision pattern
Over his 4-year tenure, your judge's approval rate has fluctuated, starting at 50% in 2016 before shifting to 33% in 2017 and 38% in 2018. The most recent data from 2019 shows an approval rate of 47%. This trend indicates that his approach to evidence and case requirements has evolved over time.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Fleming'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 with Judge Fleming? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Atlanta North hearing office
The Atlanta North Hearing Office serves a significant volume of claimants throughout Georgia, managing a diverse caseload with a bench of 6 judges. The office currently maintains an approval rate of 49%, reflecting the regional standards for disability adjudication. If you are appearing here, you should be prepared for a thorough review of your medical records and vocational evidence.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to this judge is essentially random. Within the Atlanta North office, lifetime approval rates among the 6 judges range from 22% to 62%. This variance highlights why understanding the local bench is important for your hearing strategy. You can view the full roster of judges on the Atlanta North hearing office page.
Your odds change dramatically with a lawyer
SSDI hearing approval rates — represented vs. on your own
Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37. The 3× gap is a population-wide average across all judges; individual outcomes vary.
