Arkansas inmate Dontay Lay (Lay) appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Local Rules of the Eastern District of Arkansas, which allows dismissal if a communication from the court is not responded to within thirty days. The district court dismissed the action after Lay failed to respond to the district court’s order to amend his complaint within thirty days. Upon careful review, we conclude that the dismissal was not an abuse of discretion. See Nw. Bank & Trust Co. v. First Ill. Nat’l Bank, 354 F.3d 721, 725 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review); Settlemire v. Watson, 877 F.2d 13, 14 (8th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) (affirming district court’s dismissal without prejudice of pro se complaint pursuant to local rule allowing dismissal where litigant fails to respond to communication of court within thirty days).

Although Lay contends he did not receive the district court’s order directing him to amend his complaint, Lay did not raise this matter before the district court and we will not consider the argument for the first time on appeal. See Poolman v. City of Grafton, 487 F.3d 1098, 1101 (8th Cir. 2007).

Accordingly, we affirm.