The Court of Appeals reviews de novo whether the trial court properly denied leave to amend (following granting a motion to dismiss) on the ground of futility. Here, the Court of Appeals agreed with the district court that further amendment would be futile because in dismissing the previous complaint, the district court explained in some detail what needed to be fixed, yet the next complaint filed by the plaintiff did not fix those defects. And plaintiffs did not suggest in their appellate brief what additional facts they could allege to fix those problems if granted leave to amend.