David Jeep appeals the district court’s 1 orders dismissing his claims against multiple defendants and granting summary judgment to the remaining defendants in his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action. After careful review, we conclude that the orders were proper for the reasons stated by the district court and that an extended discussion is not warranted. See Maness v. Dist. Court, 495 F.3d 943, 943-44 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (de novo review of dismissals based on immunity); Rouse v. Benson, 193 F.3d 936, 939 (8th Cir. 1999) (district court’s grant of summary judgment reviewed de novo).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court, see 8th Cir. R. 47B, and we deny as moot Jeep’s motion for an expedited appeal.