Case Name: Randal Wayne ENYEART; Rodney A. Mattmiller, Appellants, v. State of MINNESOTA; Michael A. Hatch; Dan Salomone; Robert M. Gates; Alberto R. Gonzales; Mary E. Peters, Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-03-13
Citations: 218 F. App'x 560
Docket Number: No. 06-1510
Parties: Randal Wayne ENYEART; Rodney A. Mattmiller, Appellants, v. State of MINNESOTA; Michael A. Hatch; Dan Salomone; Robert M. Gates; Alberto R. Gonzales; Mary E. Peters, Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 218
Pages: 560–560

Head Matter:
Randal Wayne ENYEART; Rodney A. Mattmiller, Appellants, v. State of MINNESOTA; Michael A. Hatch; Dan Salomone; Robert M. Gates; Alberto R. Gonzales; Mary E. Peters, Appellees.
No. 06-1510.
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: March 7, 2007.
Filed: March 13, 2007.
Randall Wayne Enyeart, Excelsior, MN, pro se.
Rodney A. Mattmiller, Hastings, MN, John Steven Garry, Attorney General’s Office, St. Paul, MN, Joan Decoursin Humes, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Minneapolis, MN, for Appellees.
Before COLLOTON, HANSEN, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.
. Robert M. Gates and Mary E. Peters have been appointed to serve as the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Transportation, respectively, and are substituted as appellees pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Randall Enyeart and Rodney Mattmiller appeal from the district court's final order and judgment dismissing with prejudice, under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), their action for declaratory relief against the State of Minnesota, two Minnesota officials, and three federal officials under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Upon de novo review, see M.P. ex rel. K. & D.P. v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 721, 439 F.3d 865, 867 (8th Cir.2006) (dismissal for lack of jurisdiction reviewed de novo); Stringer v. St. James R-1 Sch. Dist. 446 F.3d 799, 802 (8th Cir.2006) (dismissal for failure to state claim reviewed de novo), we agree with the district court's well-reasoned order. We also conclude that the court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs' motion to realign the parties. The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.
. The Honorable Michael J. Davis, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.