Struck

MEMORANDUM **

Angela Faith Struck appeals the district court’s judgment affirming an Administra *86 tive Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) decision denying her application for supplemental security income benefits. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we reverse.

We review de novo a district court’s order upholding the denial of benefits, Reddick v. Chater, 157 F.3d 715, 720 (9th Cir.1998). We may set aside a denial of benefits only if it is not supported by substantial evidence or is based on legal error. Robbins v. Soc. Sec. Admin., 466 F.3d 880, 882 (9th Cir.2006).

Struck first argues that the ALJ violated her due process rights by failing to attend a supplemental hearing, which was instead presided over by a different ALJ. This argument is without merit. None of the HALLEX 1 provisions on which Struck relies are applicable under the circumstances. Nor did the ALJ make any findings in his decision that might have been affected by his nonattendance at the supplemental hearing.

Struck also argues that the ALJ failed to fulfill his duty to fully and fairly develop the record, because he did not request needed hospital records. See Brown v. Heckler, 713 F.2d 441, 443 (9th…