Appling

MEMORANDUM **

Plaintiff Judith A. Appling appeals from the district court’s decision to affirm the Commissioner of Social Security’s denial of her application for disability insurance benefits. On de novo review, Reddick v. Chafer, 157 F.3d 715 , 720 (9th Cir.1998), we affirm.

1. Substantial evidence supports the determination of the administrative law judge (“ALJ”) to discount Plaintiffs testimony regarding the extent of her pain. The ALJ provided clear and convincing reasons. See Rollins v. Massanari, 261 F.3d 853, 856-57 (9th Cir.2001) (stating standard). The ALJ cited inconsistencies with the medical evidence, inconsistencies with reported daily activities, and demean- or, factors that are supported by the record (for instance, Dr. Benjamin’s statement that Plaintiffs “pain syndrome is certainly, at this point, in excess of demonstrable disease”; and Plaintiffs testimony *45 that she could “do household chores at that time,” 1 as well as “walk 1 — 2 miles and lift 25 pounds”). Taken together, the ALJ’s reasons for discounting Plaintiffs excess pain testimony are clear and convincing.

2. The ALJ was not required to develop the record with respect to Plaintiffs depression.…