Keaton Lee Amos, who pleaded guilty to a drug-conspiracy offense, appeals the 140-month sentence the district court 1 imposed after granting the government’s Federal Rule of Criminal Px'ocedure 35(b) motion to reduce Amos’s sentence based on substantial assistance. Amos argues that the sentence is unreasonable because (1) it is greater than necessary to promote the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), (2) other defendants in the conspiracy received lesser sentences, and (3) the court did not adequately consider Amos’s assistance and circumstances when determining the amount of the reduction.

Upon review, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to consider Amos’s appeal. See United States v. Haskins, 479 F.3d 955, 957 (8th Cir. 2007) (per curiam) (jurisdiction over appeal of Rule 35(b) sentence is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a); although defendant framed issue as sentence’s overall reasonableness, he was appealing court’s ruling on motion to reduce sentence, and the court lacked jurisdiction *446 because he did not satisfy criteria of § 3742(a)).

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.