
    James NEUMAN Plaintiff-Appellant v. State of IOWA; Black Hawk County, Iowa; Black Hawk County Courthouse; Black Hawk County Attorney Office; City of Evansdale, Iowa; M. Kellyann Lekar, Chief Judge, Black Hawk County; Joel A. Dalrymple, Judge, Black Hawk County; Joseph M. Moothart, Judge, Black Hawk County; Nathan Callahan, Judge, Black Hawk County; Thomas Ferguson, District Attorney, Black Hawk County; Emily Zerkel; Black Hawk County Attorney; Brian Williams, Black Hawk County Attorney; Jeremy Westendorf, Black Hawk County Attorney; Roberts, Stevens, Prendergast & Guthrie, PPLC; Carter J. Stevens, Attorney, in his professional and individual capacities; Carolyn Inman, Paralegal, in her professional and individual capacities; Cassidy Dietz, Evandsdale Police Officer, in his professional and individual capacities Defendants-Appellees
    No. 16-4460
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 2, 2017
    Filed: November 13, 2017
    James Neuman, Pro Se
    Rebecca Barloon, Jeffrey C. Peterzalek, Attorney General’s Office, Des Moines, IA, for Defendants-Appellees State of Iowa, M, Kellyann Lekar, .Joel. A. Dalrymple, Joseph M. Moothart, Nathan Callahan
    John T. McCoy, McCoy & Riley, Waterloo, IA, for Defendants-Appellees Black Hawk County, Iowa, Black Hawk County Courthouse, Black Hawk County Attorney Office, Thomas Ferguson, Emily Zerkel; Brian Williams, Jeremy Westendorf
    Wilford H. Stone, Cassandra Wolfgram, Lynch & Dallas, Cedar Rapids, IA, for Defendants-Appellees City of Evansdale, Iowa, Cassidy Dietz
    
      Erik P. Bergeland, Kevin J. Driscoll, Andrew T. Patton, Finley Law Firm, Des Moines, IA, for Defendants-Appellees Roberts, Stevens, Prendergast & Guthrie, PPLC, Carter J. Stevens, Attorney, Carolyn Inman
    Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Iowa resident James Neuman appeals the district court’s dismissal of his pro se complaint, in which he alleged numerous irregularities arising out of his February 2014 arrest on suspicion of operating a vehicle while intoxicated, and the subsequent court proceedings. Upon careful de novo review, we conclude that dismissal was proper because the district court lacked jurisdiction under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, see Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Saudi Basic Indus. Corp., 544 U.S. 280, 284, 125 S.Ct. 1517, 161 L.Ed.2d 454 (2005); see also Skit Int’l, Ltd. v. DAC Techs. of Ark., Inc., 487 F.3d 1154, 1156 (8th Cir. 2007) (standard of review); and, in any event, Neuman failed to state a claim against the named defendants, see Moore v. Sims, 200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (standard of review). We also conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in declining to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over numerous state-law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367; Elmore v. Harbor Brand Freight Tools USA, Inc., 844 F.3d 764, 767 (8th Cir. 2016) (standard of review), cert. denied, 2017 WL 2869943 (U.S. Oct. 10, 2017) (No. 17-22).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 
      
      . The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern District of Iowa.
     
      
      . See D.C. Ct. of App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983); Rooker v. Fid. Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413, 44 S.Ct. 149, 68 L.Ed. 362 (1923).
     