Iowa inmate Men Huenefeld appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Having conducted careful de novo review of the record, see Mack v. Dillon, 594 F.3d 620, 622 (8th Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (standard of review), we agree with the district court that summary judgment was warranted. Further, Huenefeld did not make the required showing below that summary judgment was premature; and his complaints on appeal regarding the effectiveness of his appointed counsel are not a basis for reversal, see Taylor v. Dickel, 293 F.3d 427, 431 (8th Cir. 2002). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.