Daniel Coyle appeals the order of the District Court 1 granting summary judgment to Aquila, Inc., in his employment-discrimination action. After reviewing the record de novo, viewing it in the light most favorable to Coyle, we conclude that summary judgment was proper for the reasons stated by the District Court. See Didier v. Schwan Food Co., 465 F.3d 838, 841 (8th Cir. 2006) (standard of review). We decline to consider Coyle’s arguments raised for the first time on appeal. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, we affirm.