Missouri inmate Alonzo Coleman appeals from the District Court’s 1 dismissal without prejudice of his civil rights action for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Having carefully reviewed the record, see Johnson v. Jones, 340 F.3d 624, 626 (findings of fact reviewed for clear error and conclusions of law reviewed de novo), we conclude the District Court properly dismissed the lawsuit because (1) Coleman asserted unexhausted claims based on events taking place after the date of his last grievance, see Graves v. Norris, 218 F.3d 884, 885-86 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (dismissal of entire suit was proper where some of inmate’s claims were unexhausted); and (2) Coleman did not exhaust (or even attempt to grieve) his asserted claims against Crossroads Correctional Center Superintendent Michael Kemna, see Love v. May, 63 Fed. Appx. 282, 283 (8th Cir. 2003) (unpublished per curiam) (dismissal for non-exhaustion proper where inmate failed to file claims against director, warden, and assistant warden).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.