
    Gary J. BRUNZO, Appellant, v. Harold W. CLARKE, Director of Corrections; Mike Kenny, Chief Executive Officer; M. Rose, Administrator/Supervisor; Scott Isherwood, Unit # 1, Housing Unit Manager; Unknown Zeisset, Sergeant, Investigating Officer; Steve Burta, Case Manager; J.L. Darling, Classification/Programs; Layne Gissler, Segregation Officer/Review Chair; Jason Simmon, Board Member; Randy Crosby, Board Member; Scott Marshall, Board Member; Frank X. Hopkins, Associate Director; Robert Madsen, Board Member, Appellees.
    No. 02-2553.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted March 5, 2003.
    Decided March 6, 2003.
    Before BOWMAN, WOLLMAN, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Nebraska inmate Gary Brunzo brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, claiming that his continued placement in administrative confinement violated his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The district court granted defendants summary judgment, and denied Brunzo’s motion for reconsideration. Brunzo appeals. After careful review of the record, we affirm.

Under our cases, the alleged conditions of Brunzo’s confinement simply do not amount to an atypical and significant hardship relative to the ordinary incidents of prison life. See Portley-El v. Brill, 288 F.3d 1063,1065 (8th Cir.2002); Kennedy v. Blankenship, 100 F.3d 640, 642-43 & n. 2 (8th Cir.1996). As a result, summary judgment was appropriate, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying reconsideration, see Smith v. Chem. Leaman Tank Lines, Inc., 285 F.3d 750, 752 (8th Cir.2002) (standard of review for motion for reconsideration).

Accordingly, we affirm. 
      
      . The HONORABLE RICHARD G. KOPF, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska.
     