Patrick Bouvia Kimble, Texas prisoner # 712624, brought this case under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 to challenge his Texas murder conviction. The district court concluded that the application was a successive one and transferred it to this court so that Kimble might seek authorization to proceed. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); In re Epps, 127 F.3d 364, 364-65 (5th Cir. 1997). The district court denied a certifícate of appealability (COA). Kimble filed a timely notice of appeal and moved for a COA from this court. In a separate proceeding, a panel of this court concluded that Kim-ble’s proposed § 2254 application was indeed successive and denied Kimble authorization to file it. In re Kimble, 14-10526. 1

Implicitly agreeing that his proposed § 2254 application is a successive one, Kimble has abandoned any challenge to the district court’s transfer order. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). We conclude that the district court “did not err by transferring the [application] for lack of jurisdiction.” Fulton, 780 F.3d at 686. We therefore DENY Kim-ble’s motion for a COA as unnecessary and AFFIRM the district court’s transfer order. ^