ORDER
Haasan Hijrahannah sued UMG Recordings, alleging that he created sheet music and provided it to the company, which used it for financial gain in violation of numerous federal statutes, including the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101-1332, and its amendment, the Visual Artists Rights Act, id. § 106A. He also invokes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and several state laws. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim because Hijrahannah did not allege that he owned a valid copyright or protectable work of visual art, and the Declaration provides no private right of action. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Hijrahannah’s state-law claims. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(8).
Hijrahannah generally contests the district eoürt’s order, urging that his claims should move forward. But Hijrahannah has failed to develop any argument that would provide a basis to disturb the district court’s judgment. See Fed. R.App. P. 28(a)(8). For substantially the reasons stated by the district court, we Affirm.