David Jeep appeals after the district court 1 dismissed his civil complaint pre-service for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Upon careful de novo review, see Hart v. United States, 630 F.3d 1085, 1088 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review), we conclude that the district court appropriately dismissed the complaint, see Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(h)(3) (if court determines at *643 any time that it lacks subject matter jurisdiction, court must dismiss action); Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 586-38, 94 S.Ct. 1372, 39 L.Ed.2d 577 (1974) (federal courts are without power to entertain claims otherwise within their jurisdiction if they are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit); Biscanin v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 407 F.3d 905, 907 (8th Cir. 2005) (“[i]f the asserted basis of federal jurisdiction is patently meritless, then dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is appropriate”; court determines whether asserted jurisdictional basis is patently meritless by looking to face of complaint and drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiff).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.