Missouri inmate Samuel Lewis Taylor appeals following the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. We find that Taylor’s claims of access to the courts, conspiracy, and due process were properly dismissed under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B), see Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (de novo review), because Taylor’s complaint contained insufficient facts to support such claims, see Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004) (pro se complaints must be liberally construed, but must allege sufficient facts to support claims advanced). Further, we find that summary judgment was properly granted on Taylor’s remaining First Amendment retaliation claims. See Holt v. Howard, 806 F.3d 1129, 1132 (8th Cir. 2015) (de novo review); Santiago v. Blair, 707 F.3d 984, 991 (8th Cir. 2013) (elements of retaliation claim). 2 Finally, we find no error in the denial of Taylor’s motion to compel. See Heart of Am. Grain Insp. Serv., Inc. v. Mo. Dep’t of Agric., 123 F.3d 1098, 1107 (8th Cir. 1997) (gross-abuse-of-discretion standard of re *567 view). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.