Paul Katekaru appeals after the district court 1 adversely granted summary judgment on two of his claims, dismissed a third claim without prejudice for lack of standing, and denied his post-judgment motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e). After carefully reviewing the record, and parties’ arguments on appeal, we find no basis to reverse. See Brooks v. Roy, 776 F.3d 957, 959-60 (8th Cir. 2015) (grant of summary judgment reviewed de novo); Hodak v. City of St. Peters, 535 F.3d 899, 903 (8th Cir. 2008) (determination as to plaintiffs standing reviewed de novo); United States v. Metro. St. Louis Sewer Dist., 440 F.3d 930, 933-34 (8th Cir. 2006) (denial of Rule 59(e) motion reviewed for abuse of discretion). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.