Case Name: Scott MEYER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Bryan MCKINLEY; James Drew; Christopher Foy; P.J. Vaitheswaran; Richard Doyle; J.J. McDonald; Emily Pederson; Vicki Pederson; Brian Pederson; John Sorenson; William Morrison; Earl Kavanaugh Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-23
Citations: 655 F. App'x 522
Docket Number: No. 16-1209
Parties: Scott MEYER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Bryan MCKINLEY; James Drew; Christopher Foy; P.J. Vaitheswaran; Richard Doyle; J.J. McDonald; Emily Pederson; Vicki Pederson; Brian Pederson; John Sorenson; William Morrison; Earl Kavanaugh Defendants-Appellees
Judges: Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and ' MURPHY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 655
Pages: 522–522

Head Matter:
Scott MEYER Plaintiff-Appellant v. Bryan MCKINLEY; James Drew; Christopher Foy; P.J. Vaitheswaran; Richard Doyle; J.J. McDonald; Emily Pederson; Vicki Pederson; Brian Pederson; John Sorenson; William Morrison; Earl Kavanaugh Defendants-Appellees
No. 16-1209
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: August 18, 2016
Filed: August 23, 2016
Scott Meyer, Pro Se
Jeffrey C. Peterzalek, Attorney General’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Defón-dants-Appellees Bryan McKinley, James Drew, Christopher Foy, P.J. Vaitheswar-an, Richard Doyle, J. J. McDonald
John T. McCoy, McCoy & Riley, for Defendants-Appellees Emily Pederson, Vicki Pederson, Brian Pederson
Nicholas J. Kilburg, Paula L. Roby, Eld-erkin & Pirnie, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Defendants-Appellees John Sorenson, William Morrison
David A. Morse, Law Offices of David a Morse, for Defendant-Appellee Earl Kava-naugh
Before WOLLMAN, ARNOLD, and ' MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
[Unpublished]
Scott Meyer filed a civil complaint raising claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 1985 arising out of child-custody proceedings. The district court granted defendants' motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), and this appeal followed. Having conducted de novo review of the record before us, and carefully considered the parties' submissions on appeal, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed the complaint for the reasons explained in the court's thorough memorandum opinion. See Gomez v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 676 F.3d 655, 660 (8th Cir. 2012) (dismissal for failure to state claim upon which relief could be granted); Edwards v. City of Jonesboro, 645 F,3d 1014, 1017 (8th Cir. 2011) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction). We also conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint. See Ginsburg v. InBev NV/SA, 623 F.3d 1229, 1236 (8th Cir. 2010). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Linda R. Reade, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa.