James Widtfeldt appeals from a decision of the Tax Court 1 dismissing his petition for lack of jurisdiction. Following careful de novo review, see Bartman v. Comm’r, 446 F.3d 785, 787 (8th Cir. 2006) (noting that appellate court reviews de novo tax court’s conclusion of law, including determination regarding its jurisdiction), we conclude that the dismissal was appropriate for the reasons discussed by the Tax Court. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We also deny the pending motions.