Case Name: Chambala J.E. HOLLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION, INC., doing business as Supershuttle International, Inc., doing business as Kansas City Transportation Group, Inc.; Terry O'Toole; Don Rubright; Alan Moldawer; Mark Joseph; Teresa Wolken; Tony Tymony; Cindy Simmons, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-03-18
Citations: 502 F. App'x 617
Docket Number: No. 12-2737
Parties: Chambala J.E. HOLLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION, INC., doing business as Supershuttle International, Inc., doing business as Kansas City Transportation Group, Inc.; Terry O’Toole; Don Rubright; Alan Moldawer; Mark Joseph; Teresa Wolken; Tony Tymony; Cindy Simmons, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 502
Pages: 617–619

Head Matter:
Chambala J.E. HOLLIS, Plaintiff-Appellant v. VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION, INC., doing business as Supershuttle International, Inc., doing business as Kansas City Transportation Group, Inc.; Terry O’Toole; Don Rubright; Alan Moldawer; Mark Joseph; Teresa Wolken; Tony Tymony; Cindy Simmons, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 12-2737.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: Feb. 1, 2013.
Filed: March 18, 2013.
Chambala J.E. Hollis, I, Kansas City, MO, pro se.
James N. Foster, Jr., McMahon & Berger, St. Louis, MO, for Defendants-Appel-lees.
Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Chambala Hollis appeals the district court's order dismissing his employment-discrimination action with prejudice for failure to comply with a court order. He has also moved to strike some of appellees' statements and arguments. Upon careful review, see Smith v. Gold Dust Casino, 526 F.3d 402, 404 (8th Cir.2008) (standard of review), we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the case, see id. at 404-05 (dismissal with prejudice for failure to comply with court order is appropriate in cases of willful disobedience of court order). Accordingly, we affirm. We also deny Hollis's pending motion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Scott O. Wright, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
. The parties have briefed the issue of the correctness of a post-judgment order granting defendants attorney's fees and costs, but Hollis failed to file a new or amended notice of appeal designating this order for appeal, and thus it is not properly before us. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(4)(B)(ii) (party intending to challenge order disposing of post-judgment motion must timely file notice of appeal or amended notice of appeal).