Kris Hahn appeals the district court’s 1 order dismissing his civil action. Having carefully reviewed the record de novo, see Strand v. Diversified Collection Serv. Inc., 380 F.3d 316, 317 (8th Cir. 2004), and Hahn’s arguments on appeal, we conclude that this appeal fails. We agree with the district court that the claims dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim were not viable claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and we find that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the state law claims, which were properly dismissed without prejudice. 2

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