*1 Before BENTON, WOLLMAN, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Hollis Larson appeals the district court’s ^[1] dismissal of his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Following a careful review of the issues Larson raises on appeal, we conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing the case. See Plymouth Cty. v. Merscorp, Inc., 774 F.3d 1155, 1158 (8th Cir. 2014) (de novo review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

[1] The Honorable Wilhelmina M. Wright, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable David T. Schultz, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota. -2-