Source: U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-18-37 — analysis of SSA ALJ adult disability decisions, FY 2007–2015. Claimants with a representative were allowed benefits at a rate nearly three times higher than those without. Individual case outcomes vary based on medical evidence, the specific judge, and quality of representation.
ALJs ranked by approval rate on record. Judges with too few decisions to score are listed last.
| Rank | Judge | Most Recent Office | Approval Rate | Decisions | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | Tom L. Morris | SEATTLE, WALast decision Sep 2019 | 21% | 600 | |
| 2002 | Peter R. Lee | NEWARK, NJLast decision Jul 2026 | 20% | 2,540 | |
| 2003 | Gordan Momcilovic | SAN ANTONIO, TXLast decision Jul 2026 | 20% | 3,913 | |
| 2004 | Mark A. O'Hara | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VALast decision Sep 2019 | 20% | 730 | |
| 2005 | Susan Whittington | SAN ANTONIO, TXLast decision Sep 2021 | 20% | 1,672 | |
| 2006 | Joan Ho | ORANGE, CALast decision Sep 2016 | 19% | 330 | |
| 2007 | James F. Prothro | TUPELO, MSLast decision Sep 2019 | 19% | 1,678 | |
| 2008 | Jonathan P. Blucher | SAN ANTONIO, TXLast decision Sep 2022 | 18% | 1,466 | |
| 2009 | Suzette Knight | RICHMOND, VALast decision Jul 2026 | 18% | 3,119 | |
| 2010 | Tammy Georgian | CHARLESTON SC, SCLast decision Jul 2026 | 17% | 2,616 | |
| 2011 | Gwendolyn M. Hoover | HARRISBURG, PALast decision Sep 2024 | 17% | 1,337 | |
| 2012 | Catherine Ma | CLEVELAND, OHLast decision Jul 2026 | 17% | 2,863 | |
| 2013 | Joyce Francis | KNOXVILLE, TNLast decision Jul 2026 | 13% | 2,759 | |
| 2014 | Robert Baker | JOHNSTOWN, PALast decision Jul 2026 | 62% | 13 | |
| 2015 | Edward J. Banas | DOVER, DELast decision Sep 2016 | 70% | 84 | |
| 2016 | John R. Barker | KNOXVILLE, TNLast decision Sep 2016 | 77% | 97 | |
| 2017 | Eileen Burlison | RENO NV, NVLast decision Sep 2016 | 27% | 77 | |
| 2018 | Larry J. Butler | FORT MYERS FL, FLLast decision Sep 2017 | 38% | 99 | |
| 2019 | Mary Chrzanowski | FT LAUDERDALE, FLLast decision Sep 2017 | 87% | 95 | |
| 2020 | W. Clark | BALTIMORE, MDLast decision Sep 2017 | 42% | 81 | |
| 2021 | Michael D. Cofresi | QUEENS, NYLast decision Sep 2016 | 67% | 66 | |
| 2022 | Jan Donsbach | LOS ANGELES DOWNTOWN, CALast decision Sep 2016 | 60% | 85 | |
| 2023 | Thomas L. English | LANSING, MILast decision Sep 2016 | 52% | 98 | |
| 2024 | Diane R. Flebbe | PEORIA, ILLast decision Sep 2016 | 32% | 84 | |
| 2025 | K. Michael Foley | COLUMBUS, OHLast decision Sep 2016 | 54% | 85 | |
| 2026 | John Giannopoulos | NEWARK, NJLast decision Sep 2016 | 27% | 79 | |
| 2027 | Morton J. Gold Jr. | SAVANNAH, GALast decision Sep 2016 | 41% | 49 | |
| 2028 | Roseanne P. Gudzan | CHARLESTON SC, SCLast decision Sep 2016 | 51% | 57 | |
| 2029 | Percival Harmon | CHICAGO, ILLast decision Sep 2016 | 45% | 51 | |
| 2030 | Laura Speck Havens | SACRAMENTO, CALast decision Jul 2026 | 57% | 7 | |
| 2031 | Michael G. Heitz | DENVER, COLast decision Sep 2016 | 43% | 58 | |
| 2032 | Marilyn P. Hoppenfeld | QUEENS, NYLast decision Sep 2016 | 74% | 73 | |
| 2033 | James A. Horn | OAK BROOK, ILLast decision Sep 2016 | 64% | 66 | |
| 2034 | Alex S. Karlin | EUGENE, ORLast decision Sep 2016 | 32% | 82 | |
| 2035 | David J. Kozma | PITTSBURGH, PALast decision Sep 2016 | 69% | 83 | |
| 2036 | Linda E. Kupersmith | MIAMI, FLLast decision Sep 2016 | 43% | 61 | |
| 2037 | Roland D. Mather | LOUISVILLE, KYLast decision Sep 2016 | 69% | 49 | |
| 2038 | Bruce R. Mazzarella | BUFFALO, NYLast decision Sep 2016 | 52% | 62 | |
| 2039 | John R. Montgomery | COLUMBUS, OHLast decision Sep 2016 | 51% | 81 | |
| 2040 | Michael J. Nichols | LOUISVILLE, KYLast decision Sep 2016 | 43% | 83 | |
| 2041 | Jack F. Ostrander | BIRMINGHAM, ALLast decision Sep 2016 | 44% | 52 | |
| 2042 | John A. Ransom | FLINT, MILast decision Sep 2016 | 81% | 70 | |
| 2043 | Ethel Revels | DETROIT, MILast decision Sep 2016 | 25% | 55 | |
| 2044 | Susan J. Soddy | HOUSTON-BISSONNET, TXLast decision Sep 2016 | 8% | 334 | |
| 2045 | Sharon L. Steckler | DALLAS DOWNTOWN, TXLast decision Sep 2016 | 43% | 58 | |
| 2046 | David L. Stephens | BIRMINGHAM, ALLast decision Sep 2016 | 66% | 67 | |
| 2047 | Louis J. Volz | NEW ORLEANS, LALast decision Jul 2026 | 85% | 60 | |
| 2048 | Edmund C. Werre | TULSA, OKLast decision Sep 2016 | 58% | 93 |
Data sourced from the U.S. Social Security Administration (SSA) Office of Hearings Operations disposition records. Approval rate (SSA's term is allowance rate) covers every decision in SSA's published disposition record for the judge, across all offices — SSA's published record, not a judge's entire time on the bench. Performance score is calculated by ClaimsBoost — it is the judge's percentile rank on that approval rate among all ranked judges, and nothing else. It does not weigh caseload or consistency.
Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) at the Social Security Administration's Office of Hearings Operations are the federal officials who decide disability appeals. When your initial SSDI or SSI claim is denied, your appeal is assigned to an ALJ at the hearing office serving your area. That judge independently reviews your medical evidence, holds a hearing where you and your representative can present testimony, questions a vocational expert about jobs you could still perform, and issues a written decision on whether you qualify for benefits.
Each ALJ has their own style, pace, and tendencies. Some weigh objective medical evidence heavily; others give significant weight to claimant testimony about daily activities. Across thousands of decisions, these differences show up as measurable variation in approval rates — some judges approve 80%+ of cases while others approve under 30%. SSA assigns your judge — you cannot request a specific one.
The judge assigned to your case is one of the strongest predictors of the outcome. The same case evidence can produce a favorable decision from one ALJ and a denial from another at the same office. Knowing an individual judge's historical approval rate — and, where SSA reports it, their fully favorable rate — shows how that judge's record compares with their office, their state, and the nation. It does not predict your case: the strength of your medical evidence still decides it.
If you have a hearing scheduled, a free benefits review takes two minutes and can help you understand your options — especially whether representation is worth the contingency fee (capped by SSA at 25% of back pay or $9,200, whichever is less).
Dealing with disability or injury? Get your free benefits review.
How ClaimsBoost is paid: ClaimsBoost is free for consumers to use. Participating law firms pay ClaimsBoost.