David Parrish appeals the district court’s 1 orders dismissing his action based on immunity and lack of jurisdiction, and denying appointment of counsel. Upon de novo review, see Rose v. U.S. Dep’t of Educ., 187 F.3d 926, 928 (8th Cir. 1999); Clarinda Home Health v. Shalala, 100 F.3d 526, 528 (8th Cir. 1996), we conclude the district court did not err in denying appointment of counsel, and we affirm the dismissal for the reasons stated in the district court’s order. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

A true copy.