SSA Administrative Law Judge

Hon. Larry A. Miller

Last decided RaleighSep 2020
Decisions 1,906since 2016

Hearing scheduled?

Free Benefits Review

Approval rates

Comparing approval rates requires looking at data from the same timeframe to ensure accuracy. The 54% approval rate for Larry A. Miller reflects his entire record since 2016, which can be evaluated against the 27% to 74% range observed among the 17 judges whose most recent office on record is Raleigh. With 1,906 decisions on record, this data provides a stable view of past activity. Aggregate rates describe past decisions, not predictions for your individual hearing.

All decisions on record SSA records since 2016
Approval rate 54%
Decisions on record 1,906

SSA has not published a latest-period approval, fully favorable or denial breakdown for Judge Miller. The most recent period with decisions on record is September 25, 2020. Those rows are left out rather than estimated.

Approval rate over time

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

Judge Miller
0%20%40%60%80%100%FY16FY20
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

Your judge's approval trend has shown variation since 2016. After an initial 52% approval rate in 2016, the figures fluctuated, reaching 59% in 2017 before settling into a period of 53% in 2018 and 2019. The final partial year of data in 2020 saw a return to 59% approval across 95 decisions. This pattern suggests that while the rate has shifted, it remains within a consistent range over the 1,906 total decisions on record.

Preparing for an SSDI hearing

The guidance below applies to any SSDI hearing, not specifically to Judge Miller'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 Raleigh hearing office

The Raleigh hearing office serves you and other claimants across North Carolina and the surrounding region. It is supported by a bench of 17 judges whose most recent office on record is this location. You can expect a standard administrative process where the quality of your medical evidence remains the primary factor in a favorable outcome. You can see the Raleigh Hearing Office page for the full ALJ roster.

Other judges whose most recent office on record is Raleigh

The Social Security Administration uses a workload-balancing algorithm to assign cases, meaning the judge you are assigned is essentially random. There are 17 judges whose most recent office on record is the Raleigh hearing office, with approval rates ranging from 27% to 74% on their since-2016 records. Because case assignment is outside of your control, understanding the broader bench is helpful for your preparation.

Approval rates change with a lawyer

WITHOUT A LAWYER
1×
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