Jesse Loor, a state pretrial detainee proceeding informa pauperis, appeals pro se from the dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 lawsuit for failure to state a claim, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). After considering Loor’s brief and conducting a de novo review of the record on appeal, we find that the issues and arguments Loor raises are unavailing. Since Loor is proceeding pro se, we liberally construe his pleadings; however, we may not rewrite Loor’s complaint. See Snow v. DirecTV, Inc., 450 F.3d 1314, 1320 (11th Cir. 2006); Tannenbamn v. United States, 148 F.3d 1262, 1263 (11th Cir. 1998) (per curiam). Loor failed to state a facially plausible claim for relief against any of the named defendants. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009); see also § 1915(e)(2)(B) (compelling dismissal when an in forma pauperis case fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted). Accordingly, Loor’s action was properly dismissed, and we affirm the district court.

AFFIRMED.