Robert L. Kale appeals the district court’s 1 Federal Rule Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) dismissal of his complaint against several members of the Arkansas State Medical Board, alleging violations of his constitutional rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He also appeals the court’s denial of his post-judgment motion to amend his complaint to add a state-law defamation claim and assert diversity jurisdiction.

Having carefully reviewed the record and considered Dr. Kale’s arguments, we find no basis for reversing the dismissal of the complaint. See Springdale Educ. Ass’n v. Springdale Sch. Dist., 133 F.3d 649, 651 (8th Cir. 1998) (de novo standard of review). We also conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying Dr. Kale’s motion to amend his complaint. See Pames v. Gateway 2000, Inc., 122 F.3d 539, 550-51 (8th Cir. 1997) (after complaint is dismissed, right to amend under Fed.R.Civ.P. 15(a) terminates and leave to amend is matter for district court’s discretion). The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.