ORDER

EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On January 26, 2011, defendants Nangalama and Ma each filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Dckt. No. 32, 40. Plaintiff has not opposed either motion.

A responding party's failure "to file written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any opposition to the granting of the motion and may result in the imposition of sanctions." L. R. 230(l). Failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules "may be grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." L. R. 110. The court may recommend this action be dismissed with or without prejudice, as appropriate, if plaintiff disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1252 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in dismissing pro se plaintiff's complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff's failure to comply with local rule regarding notice of change of address affirmed);

On December 13, 2010, the court advised plaintiff of the requirements for filing an opposition to the motion, that failure to oppose such a motion may be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion, and that failure to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation of dismissal.

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, within twenty-one days of the date of this order, plaintiff shall either file an opposition to the motions for summary judgment or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.