Federal prisoner Jeffrey Soboroff appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal, without prejudice, of his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint challenging an alleged deprivation of a “religious accommodation” and other vaguely described conditions of confinement. We grant Soboroffs motion to supplement his brief.

Upon de novo review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper because Soboroff failed to allege sufficient facts to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (in civil action in which prisoner seeks redress *574 from governmental entity or employee of governmental entity, court shall dismiss complaint if it fails to state claim upon which relief may be granted); Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677-83, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state claim plausible on its face; threadbare recitals of elements of cause of action supported by mere conclusory statements are not entitled to assumption of truth); see also Cooper v. Schriro, 189 F.3d 781, 783 (8th Cir. 1999) (per curiam) (de novo standard of review).

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