Antonio Coley appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment on his medical deliberate-indifference claim against nurse Marybeth Floyd. Coley also challenges the district court’s denials of his motion seeking recusal of the magistrate judge, and his motion to strike a physician’s affidavit from the summary judgment record.

To begin, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying either Coley’s motion seeking the magistrate judge’s recusal, or his motion to strike the affidavit. See Pope v. Fed. Express Corp., 974 F.2d 982, 985 (8th Cir. 1992) (reviewing decision on recusal motion for abuse of discretion); see also DG&G, Inc. v. FlexSol Packaging Corp. of Pompano Beach, 576 F.3d 820, 826 (8th Cir. 2009) (district court has broad discretion in permitting supplementation of summary judgment record). As to the grant of summary judgment in favor of Floyd, we conclude upon de novo review of the record that the district court’s decision was proper. See Mason v. Corr. Med. Servs., Inc., 559 F.3d 880, 884-85 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review); Dulany v. Carnahan, 132 F.3d 1234, 1239-40 (8th Cir. 1997) (discussing deliberate-indifference standard in context of medical claims).

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