James Ray Thompson, Jr. appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1988 action following an evidentiary hearing. For reversal, he argues that the court erred by dismissing his suit as a sanction for failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s report, and he contends that he did not receive the report in time to file objections. Thompson misunderstands the basis for the dismissal of this case. The district court dismissed the case on the merits after adopting the findings and analysis in the magistrate judge’s report — not to punish Thompson for failing to file objections. Further, Thompson does not demonstrate, and we cannot discern, that he suffered prejudice by not filing timely objections. The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.