ORDER

ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.

On March 23, 2017, defendants filed motions to dismiss plaintiff's complaint. ECF Nos. 124, 125. Hearing on defendants' motion to dismiss is presently set before the undersigned for May 3, 2017.1 ECF No. 127 (minute order). Attorney Paul R. Martin is counsel of record for plaintiff. See ECF No. 117. Pursuant to this court's Local Rules, counsel for plaintiff was required to file and serve a written opposition or statement of non-opposition to the pending motions at least fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing date, or April 19, 2017. See E.D. Cal. L.R. 230(c).2 Plaintiff has failed to file written oppositions or statements of non-opposition with respect to defendants' motions.

Eastern District 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 authorized by statute or Rule or within the inherent power of the Court." Case law is in accord that a district court may impose sanctions, including involuntary dismissal of a plaintiff's case pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), where that plaintiff fails to prosecute his or her case or fails to comply with the court's orders, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the court's local rules.3 See Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44 (1991) (recognizing that a court "may act sua sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute"); Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam) ("Failure to follow a district court's local rules is a proper ground for dismissal").

Nevertheless, in light of the court's desire to resolve defendants' motions on the merits, the court will continue the hearing on the motions and provide plaintiff a final opportunity to oppose the motions or file statements of non-opposition. Plaintiff's counsel is cautioned that failure to meet this extended deadline will be considered as plaintiff's non-opposition to and grounds for granting defendants' motions to dismiss. Counsel is further cautioned that a failure to comply with this order may result in the imposition of appropriate sanctions, including, but not limited to, monetary sanctions and/or the possible recommendation that plaintiff's entire case be involuntarily dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The hearing on defendants' motions to dismiss (ECF Nos. 124, 125), which is presently set for May 3, 2017, is CONTINUED until May 17, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 26 (AC) before the undersigned.

2. Plaintiff's counsel shall file written oppositions to defendants' motions, or statements of non-opposition thereto, on or before May 3, 2017. Plaintiff's counsel's failure to file written oppositions will be deemed a representation of non-opposition to the pending motions and consent to the granting of the motions, and shall constitute an additional ground for the imposition of appropriate sanctions, including monetary sanctions and/or a possible recommendation that plaintiff's entire case be involuntarily dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

3. Defendants may file a written reply to plaintiff's opposition, if any, on or before May 10, 2017.