Tommye C. Mangus is an SSA Administrative Law Judge at the Middlesboro hearing office. Over 10 years on the bench and 27,110 lifetime decisions, the judge has maintained a 46% approval rate. This sits below the national average of 58%, though recent trends show an uptick to 56% in the latest period. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing. An attorney can help you prepare for the specific requirements of this courtroom.
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
Comparing approval rates provides context for your hearing, though every case is unique. Tommye C. Mangus has a lifetime approval rate of 46% based on 27,110 lifetime decisions. This is currently 6 percentage points below the Middlesboro office average and 12 points below the national average of 58%. These aggregate rates reflect historical patterns rather than specific outcomes for your claim.
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 Mangus'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 a decade on the bench, the approval rate for Tommye C. Mangus has fluctuated across 27,110 lifetime decisions. While the rate dipped to 40% in 2019, the trend has shifted upward in recent years, reaching 56% in 2025. These shifts often reflect changes in the complexity of cases or the quality of evidence presented in the Middlesboro hearing room.
Preparing for an SSDI hearing
The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Mangus'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 Mangus? Free, confidential — see if you qualify for SSDI.
Free Benefits ReviewAbout the Middlesboro hearing office
The Middlesboro hearing office serves you throughout the region, managing a high volume of disability cases. With a bench of 6 judges, the office maintains an average approval rate of 52%. You can expect a formal administrative process focused on medical documentation and vocational testimony.
Other judges at this hearing office
The Social Security Administration assigns cases through a workload-balancing algorithm, meaning your assignment to Tommye C. Mangus is essentially random. The Middlesboro bench consists of 6 judges with lifetime approval rates ranging from 46% to 59%. Because the judge you draw is outside your control, focusing on the strength of your medical evidence remains the most effective strategy.
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.
