MEMORANDUM**

Federal prisoner Marvin Bruce Holmes appeals pro se the district court’s judgment, characterizing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion and then denying the motion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo, United States v. Chacon-Palomares, 208 F.3d 1157, 1158 (9th Cir. 2000), and we affirm.

*553Holmes’ section 2241 habeas petition to the district court attacked the government’s jurisdiction over his conviction. The district court correctly concluded that this issue is specifically permitted to be raised in a section 2255 motion, see 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and thus properly construed Holmes’ petition as a section 2255 motion. See Moore v. Reno, 185 F.3d 1054, 1055 (9th Cir. 1999).

Therefore, the district court correctly dismissed Holmes’ petition as a second or successive petition not authorized by the Court of Appeals. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3).

All pending motions are denied.

AFFIRMED.