Stephan Moorer, federal prisoner # 03502-007, has moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the dismissal of his original Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents, 403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971), complaint as frivolous and his amended complaint for lack of proper venue. By moving for leave to proceed IFP, Moorer is challenging the district court’s certification that the appeal is not taken in good faith. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997). Moorer fails to address the district court’s finding that his original complaint was precluded by Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 115 S.Ct. 2293, 132 L.Ed.2d 418 (1995), and that his amended complaint was filed in the wrong venue. Moorer has thus abandoned any challenge to the district court’s dismissal. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy *52 Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

Moorer has not demonstrated that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, Moorer’s motion to proceed IFP is denied. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202 n. 24. Because his appeal is frivolous, see Howard, 707 F.2d at 219-20, the appeal is dismissed. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

The district court’s dismissal of Moorer’s original complaint as frivolous and our dismissal of this appeal as frivolous both count as strikes for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). See Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). Moorer is warned that, if he accumulates three strikes pursuant to § 1915(g), he may not proceed IFP in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he “is under imminent danger of serious physical injury.” § 1915(g).

MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.