
    Luanne E. LORAAS, Appellant, v. Robert GALVIN; Patrick T. Skelly, individually and as an agent and partner of the Law Offices of Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, and as an agent for Robert Galvin; Paul A. Jeddeloh, individually and as an agent and partner of the Law Offices of Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, and as an agent for Robert Galvin; Ferdinand F. Peters, individually and as an agent and partner of the Law Offices of Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, and as an agent for Robert Galvin; Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, as a partnership and as an agent for Robert Galvin; Shirley A. Reider, individually and as an agent of Shirley A. Reider, Attorney at Law, and an agent of the Law Offices of Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, and as an agent of Robert Galvin; Shirley A. Reider, Attorney at Law, a sole proprietorship and as agent for the Law Offices of Peters, Jeddeloh & Skelly, LLP, and as an agent for Robert Galvin; Patrice K. Sutherland, individually and in her official capacity as an agent of Dakota County, as an agent of the State of Minnesota and as an officer of the State of Minnesota; Leslie M. Met-zen, individually and in her official capacity as an agent of Dakota County, as an agent of the State of Minnesota and as an officer of the State of Minnesota; Dakota County; State of Minnesota, Appellees.
    No. 01-3625.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted April 4, 2002.
    Filed April 11, 2002.
    Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and BYE, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Luanne E. Loraas appeals from the final judgment entered in the District Court for the District of Minnesota, granting judgment for defendants and disposing of her various federal and state law claims. This lawsuit arose when certain defendants initiated a sanctions action against Loraas after her client in a divorce proceeding had terminated Loraas’s services. The parties submitted voluminous materials in support of their arguments, and the district court thoroughly reviewed each claim. After de novo review, see Winkle v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 195 F.3d 418, 420 (8th Cir.1999) (Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 summary judgment); Ring v. First Interstate Mortgage, Inc., 984 F.2d 924, 926 (8th Cir.1993) (Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) dismissal), we agree with the district court that all of Loraas’s substantive claims lacked merit. Also, we defer to the district court’s ruling that Loraas’s objections to the magistrate’s report be only ten pages, see In re Starr, 152 F.3d 741, 745 n. 12 (8th Cir. 1998), and we concur with the district court’s ruling that Loraas was not entitled to a default judgment for defendants’ alleged untimely filings, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(a)(1)(B).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L. Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.
     