In this appeal in a diversity case, Rod Nussbaum challenges the district court’s 1 adverse grant of partial summary judg *514 ment, and the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law issued after a bench trial. Upon carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis for reversal. See Residential Funding Co., LLC v. Terrace Mortg. Co., 725 F.3d 910, 915 (8th Cir. 2013) (grant of summary judgment reviewed de novo; to avoid summary judgment, party must substantiate its allegations with sufficient probative evidence that would permit finding in its favor); Ofor v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 649 F.3d 808, 813 (8th Cir. 2011) (in reviewing decision based on bench trial, findings of fact are reviewed for clear error and interpretations of state law are reviewed de novo). In particular, we find no merit to Nussbaum’s arguments challenging the district court’s conclusion that certain defendants were not liable for failing to ensure that a performance bond was received in accordance with Missouri law. See Union Pac. R.R. Co. v. St. Louis Marketplace, Ltd. P’ship, 212 F.3d 386, 390-91 (8th Cir. 2000) (city board discharged ministerial duty to require bond by transforming contractual bond requirement into legal requirement, where board’s legislative function limited its power to ensure compliance with ordinance). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.