Jay Driesen appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his civil complaint asserting that his rights were violated in connection with prior state-court proceedings. Upon careful de novo review, we agree with the district court that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. See Minch Family LLLP v. Buffalo-Red River Watershed Dist., 628 F.3d 960, 965 (8th Cir. 2010) (de novo standard of review). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Driesen’s request for leave to amend his complaint. See Horras v. Am. Capital Strategies, Ltd., 729 F.3d 798, 804 (8th Cir. 2013) (district court has considerable discretion to deny post-judgment motion for leave to amend), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 134 S.Ct. 1346, 188 L.Ed.2d 310 (2014).

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