MEMORANDUM *

Satish Shetty appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his di *835 versity action alleging foreclosure-related claims. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion a dismissal for failure to comply with local rules. Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995). We affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Shetty’s action because Shetty did not file an opposition to defendants’ Fed. R, Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion, request an extension of time to do so, or file an amended complaint. See id. (discussing factors to guide the court’s evaluation of dismissal for failure to comply with local rules); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B) (allowing a party 21 days to amend its pleading after sendee of a motion under Rule 12(b)); C.D. Cal, R. 7-9 (requiring the filing of an opposition or statement of non-opposition to a motion to dismiss not later than twenty-one days before the scheduled hearing date); C.D. Cal. R. 7-12 (providing that the failure to file a required document may be deemed consent to the granting or denial of the motion).

AFFIRMED.