[UNPUBLISHED]

Albert Davis appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his employment-discrimination action against his employer, the Department of the Army (DOA). Having carefully considered each of Davis’s arguments on appeal, see Kasper v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 425 F.3d 496, 502 (8th Cir. 2005) (de novo standard of review), we agree with the district court that Davis failed to establish that the DOA’s proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its decision not to promote him — that the hiree received a higher interview score and possessed better skills for the job-were pretextual. See Gilooly v. Mo. Dep’t of Health & Senior Servs., 421 F.3d 734, 739 (8th Cir. 2005) (burden-shifting analysis). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.