MEMORANDUM **

Bobby Darnell Gwinn appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Gwinn contends that the district court abused its discretion by declining to reduce his sentence based on the retroactive amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines that lowered penalties for crack cocaine offenses. The district court correctly concluded that Gwinn is not eligible for a sentence reduction because he is a career offender who was sentenced pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. See United States v. Wesson, 583 F.3d 728, 731 (9th Cir. 2009).

To the extent that Gwinn raises additional claims to support his request for a sentence reduction, those claims are not cognizable in a motion under section 3582(c)(2).

We decline to consider arguments raised by Gwinn for the first time in his reply brief. See United States v. Anderson, 472 F.3d 662, 668 (9th Cir. 2006).

AFFIRMED.