Juan Jose Zuniga-Hernandez, federal prisoner #23429-034, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition, wherein he challenged his conviction for using and carrying firearms and machineguns during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Zuniga-Hernandez challenges his conviction based on Bailey v. United States, 516 U.S. 137, 116 S.Ct. 501, 133 L.Ed.2d 472 (1995) and a defective indictment claim.

Zuniga-Hernandez asserts that his challenge to his § 924(c) conviction falls within the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Zuniga-Hernandez pleaded guilty to using and carrying firearms and machineguns during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, in violation of § 924(c). See United States v. Zuniga-Hernandez, 18 F.3d 1254,1257,1259 (5th Cir. 1994). Bailey did nothing to affect Zuniga-Hernandez’s conviction for carrying firearms and machine-guns. See United States v. Rivas, 85 F.3d 193, 195 (5th Cir. 1996). Zuniga-Hernandez therefore cannot show that he “may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense.” See Reyes-Requena v. United States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001).

Additionally, with regard to his indictment claim, Zuniga-Hernandez has not shown that there is “a retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that the petitioner may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense.” See Reyes-Requena, 243 F.3d at 904. Therefore, Zuniga-Hernandez’s challenge to the indictment does not fall within the savings clause of § 2255.

Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.