Prevatte

MEMORANDUM **

In this consolidated appeal, Russell Pre-vatte appeals pro se the district court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition challenging the legality of a 1996 conviction for bombing property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 844 (i). Prevatte further appeals from tbe district court’s denial of his motion to vacate, alter or amend the judgment and to amend his habeas petition. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 over this consolidated appeal.

Prevatte contends that the district court erred by dismissing his petition for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that he had failed to demonstrate that § 2255 was an inadequate or ineffective remedy. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 . We review de novo the dismissal of a section 2241 habeas petition. Tripati v. Henman, 843 F.2d 1160, 1162 (9th Cir.1988). We review the district court’s denial of Prevatte’s motion to amend, alter or vacate the judgment for an abuse of discretion. Zimmerman v. City of Oakland, 255 F.3d 734, 737 (9th Cir. 2001).

*727 The challenged conviction and sentence at issue here were imposed by the Northern District of Indiana. At the time Prevatte filed his section 2241 petition, however, he was…