
    Curtis MURPHY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. CITY UTILITIES OF SPRINGFIELD, Mo., Defendant, City of Springfield, Mo., Defendant—Appellee, Wayne Scheer, Chairman of the Board of Public Utilities of Springfield, Missouri, in both his individual and official capacity, Defendant.
    No. 05-1285.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: Jan. 13, 2006.
    Decided: Feb. 17, 2006.
    D. Carlos Romious, Kansas City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    Joanne Spears Jackson, John C. Holstein, Shughart & Thomson, Springfield, MO, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before BYE, HEANEY, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
   [UNPUBLISHED]

PER CURIAM.

Curtis Murphy appeals the district court’s adverse grant of summary judgment on each of his nineteen claims charging, inter alia, employment discrimination, retaliation,'breach of contract, promissory estoppel, unlawful termination, violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1140, defamation, and negligence. Murphy also appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to amend his complaint.

Murphy sought to amend his complaint nearly eight months after the deadline set by the district court for amending the pleadings and shortly before the close of discovery. The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Murphy’s motion to amend his complaint which sought to add new parties and claims and was bereft of reasons why the district court should allow the late amendment. See, e.g., Bell v. Allstate Life Ins. Co., 160 F.3d 452, 454 (8th Cir.1998).

After a de novo review of the record before the district court, we conclude Murphy’s claims are without merit. We affirm for the reasons given by the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Richard E. Dorr, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
     