Labbad

MEMORANDUM **

Zeput Labbad appeals the judgment of the district court affirming the decision of an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) denying her application for supplemental security income under Title XVI of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1382 . Labbad raises four contentions: (1) the ALJ failed to apply the correct legal standard, (2) the ALJ’s findings of fact were not supported by substantial evidence, (3) the ALJ’s hypothetical question to the vocational expert was improper, and (4) the ALJ committed reversible error by not developing the medical record for an earlier period. We reject all four contentions.

First, Labbad contends the ALJ failed to apply the standard under Cotton v. Bowen, 799 F.2d 1403, 1407-08 (9th Cir.1986). Under the Cotton standard, a claimant who alleges disability based on subjective symptoms “must produce objective medical evidence of an underlying impairment which could reasonably be expected to produce the pain or other symp *991 toms alleged.” Bunnell v. Sullivan, 947 F.2d 341, 344 (9th. Cir.1991) (quoting 42 U.S.C. § 423 (d)(5)(A)(1988)). The ALJ used the Cotton standard in evaluating the evidence. He acknowledged that Labbad had impairments…