Stockwell

MEMORANDUM **

Steven Stockwell (“Appellant”) appeals the district court’s order affirming the Commissioner of Social Security’s final decision that Appellant was not disabled under Title 2 of the Social Security Act. Appellant makes several challenges to the Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) determination that he was not disabled. We address each in turn.

First, Appellant asserts that the ALJ erred in finding his testimony not entirely credible as to his incapacity to work. Because the evidence demonstrates that Appellant’s treatment was generally successful in controlling his pain, that Appellant’s testimony as to his limitations was inconsistent with his daily activities, and that Appellant’s testimony as to his abilities to lift, sit, stand, and walk was inconsistent with his assertion he could not work, the ALJ’s determination was sufficiently supported by the- record and free from legal error. See Tommasetti v. Astrue, 533 F.3d 1035, 1038-40 (9th Cir.2008).

Second, Appellant argues that the ALJ erred in evaluating the medical evidence, specifically, the September 20, 2006 opinion by Appellant’s physician concluding that Appellant could not work in any available vocation…