In this appeal, Mary Bower challenges the district court’s 1 order dismissing all but one of the defendants, and the court’s adverse summary judgment decision regarding the remaining defendant. She also argues that the judge should have sua sponte recused herself.

First, we conclude that Bower’s recusal argument is meritless. Second, upon de novo review, we conclude that the district court did not err in dismissing all but one of the defendants. See Anderson-Tully Co. v. McDaniel, 571 F.3d 760, 762 (8th Cir. 2009) (grant of motion to dismiss is reviewed de novo). Finally, upon de novo review, we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted in favor of the remaining defendant, based on qualified immunity. See Brooks v. Roy, 776 F.3d 957, 959 (8th Cir. 2015) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de novo); cf. Lenderman v. St. Louis Metro. Police Dept Bd. of Police Comm’rs, 725 F.3d 843, 853-54 (8th Cir. 2013) (discussing qualified immunity standard).

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