James Louis Polk, federal prisoner # 10155-042, has filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) to appeal the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion to reduce his sentence. By moving to proceed IFP, Polk is challenging the district court’s certification decision that his appeal was not taken in good faith because it is frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 (5th Cir. 1997).

We review the district court’s denial of a Section 3582(c)(2) motion de novo. United States v. Doublin, 572 F.3d 235, 237 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 517, 175 L.Ed.2d 366 (2009). Because Polk’s guidelines imprisonment range was not derived from the quantity of crack cocaine involved in the offense but rather from his career offender status, the district court was correct in concluding that a sentencing reduction was not permitted. See § 3582(c)(2); United States v. Anderson, 591 F.3d 789, 790-91 (5th Cir. 2009).

Polk has failed to show that he will raise a nonfrivolous issue on appeal. See Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. *386 1983). His motion for IFP is denied and his appeal is dismissed as frivolous. See 5th Cm. R. 42.2.

IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED