Edmund T. Biggs appeals the district court’s * adverse grant of summary judgment in Biggs’s Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) lawsuit. Having conducted de novo review, see Tor *529 res v. UNUM Life Ins. Co. of Am., 405 F.3d 670, 677 (8th Cir. 2005), we agree Biggs’s ERISA claims must fail: the issues he raises are foreclosed by a settlement agreement he signed in 1991. Cf. Leavitt v. Nw. Bell Tel. Co., 921 F.2d 160, 162 (8th Cir. 1990) (private settlements of ERISA claims do not compromise policies underlying ERISA). Biggs offered no evidence in support of his claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, or improper conduct involving either the settlement agreement or the calculation of his benefits. His remaining assertions are either raised for the first time on appeal or are without merit.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motion.