Nellie Brown appeals pro se the dismissal of her third amended complaint. The district court dismissed Brown’s complaint for failure to perfect service of process, and Brown does not challenge that ruling. See Timson v. Sampson, 518 F.3d 870, 874 (11th Cir. 2008). The district court instructed Brown how to perfect service of process and what party to name as the proper defendant, gave her three opportunities to comply with those instructions, and warned her that the failure to perfect service of her third amended complaint would result in dismissal. Although we treat pro se litigants like Brown leniently, “we nevertheless ... require[ ] them to conform to procedural rules.” Albra v. Advan, Inc., 490 F.3d 826, 829 (11th Cir. 2007) (quoting Loren v. Sasser, 309 F.3d 1296, 1304 (11th Cir. 2002)).

We AFFIRM the dismissal of Brown’s third amended complaint.