ORDER REQUIRING PLAINTIFF TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE FIVE DAY DEADLINE

STANLEY A. BOONE, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff Lisa Leanne Clausen filed a complaint on November 3, 2017, seeking judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of Social Security ("Commissioner" or "Defendant") denying her application for disability benefits pursuant to the Social Security Act. On November 11, 2017, the Court issued a scheduling order. (ECF No. 5.) The scheduling order states that within 95 days from the filing of the administrative record, Plaintiff shall file an opening brief. Defendant lodged the Social Security administrative record on March 20, 2018. (ECF No. 10.) More than 95 days have passed and Plaintiff has not filed an opening brief nor sought an extension of time to do so.

Local Rule 110 provides that "[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules or with any order of the Court may be grounds for imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court." The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff shall file a written response to this order to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute within five (5) days of the date of service of this order. Failure to comply with this order to show cause shall result in this action being dismissed for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.