PER CURIAM. In this action claiming employment-related discrimination and retaliation, Donna Lunday appeals the district court’s adverse grant of
summary judgment. Appel-lees suggest that the appeal should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, based upon an argument that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Appel-lees alternatively argue that
summary judgment was correctly granted. We note that appellees’ argument regarding the district court’s subject matter jurisdiction does not implicate our appellate jurisdiction. In any event, we conclude that jurisdiction was proper in the district court, see Warren v. Dep’t of Army, 867 F.2d 1156, 1159 (8th Cir.1989), and, upon careful de novo review, see Torgerson v. City of Rochester, 643 F.3d 1031, 1042 (8th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 132 S.Ct. 513, 181 L.Ed.2d 349 (2011), we further conclude — for the reasons stated by the district court — that
summary judgment was appropriately granted. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. . The Honorable Daniel L. Hovland, United States District Judge for the District of North Dakota.