Gural Foster appeals after the District Court 1 dismissed his amended complaint apparently challenging the discontinuation of Supplemental Security Income payments. The complaint was dismissed without prejudice based on Foster’s failure to exhaust his administrative remedies. Upon de novo review, we conclude that the dismissal was proper. See 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) (providing for judicial review of final decisions of the Commissioner of Social Security); Schoolcraft v. Sullivan, 971 F.2d 81, 84-85 (8th Cir. 1992) (“In order for the district court to have subject matter jurisdiction under section 405(g), a claimant must have presented a claim for benefits to the Secretary and exhausted the administrative remedies prescribed by the Secretary.” (footnote omitted)), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1081, 114 S.Ct. 902, 127 L.Ed.2d 93 (1994); see also Sipp v. Astrue, 641 F.3d 975, 979 (8th Cir. 2011) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm.