Jason Inman v. Carolyn Colvin

MEMORANDUM

Jason Inman appeals the district court’s decision affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s determination that Inman did not qualify for disability insurance benefits under Title II of the Social Security Act. At step five of the sequential evaluation process, the Administrative Law Judge (“ALJ”) determined that Inman was able to perform other work, and, therefore, was not disabled. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo, Molina v. Astrue, 674 F.3d 1104, 1110 (9th Cir. 2012), and affirm in part, vacate and remand.

The ALJ did not err in finding Inman not credible with regard to whether he was disabled. The ALJ properly followed the two-step credibility analysis and provided specific, clear and convincing reasons, supported by substantial evidence, for his credibility determination, including that there were several inconsistencies between Inman’s statements of chronic pain and impairment and evidence that he sought little treatment for such pain and that he was able to participate in a -wide variety of activities despite his claimed impairment. See Burch v. Barnhart, 400 F.3d 676, 681 (9th Cir. 2006).

The ALJ also did not err in…