Marc Muklewicz v. University of Iowa

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 25-2444 ___________________________

Marc Muklewicz

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

University of Iowa; Board of Regents, State of Iowa; John Does 1-10

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa - Eastern ____________

Submitted: January 22, 2026 Filed: January 27, 2026 [Unpublished] ____________

Before LOKEN, KELLY, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Marc Muklewicz appeals the district court’s1 dismissal of his civil action, denial of leave to file an amended complaint, and failure to recuse itself sua sponte. Muklewicz also moves to supplement the record on appeal.

1 The Honorable Stephanie M. Rose, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa. Upon carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, we conclude dismissal was proper for the reasons explained by the district court. See Hastings v. Wilson, 516 F.3d 1055, 1058 (8th Cir. 2008) (grant of motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and failure to state claim reviewed de novo). We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Muklewicz leave to amend his complaint, see In re 2007 Novastar Fin. Inc., 579 F.3d 878, 884- 855 (8th Cir. 2009) (standard of review); and that there was no basis for recusal, see Fletcher v. Conoco Pipe Line Co., 323 F.3d 661, 663 (8th Cir. 2003) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the motion to supplement. ______________________________

-2-