Joseph

MEMORANDUM **

Darrell Lynn Joseph appeals pro se the dismissal with prejudice of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 habeas petition, challenging the revocation of his parole. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253 . Reviewing de novo, see McLean v. Crabtree, 173 F.3d 1176, 1180 (9th Cir.1999), we affirm.

Joseph first alleges that the United States Parole Commission (“Commission”) violated his due process rights in finding that he was guilty of conspiring with a government informant to steal aircraft. *390 Because Joseph did not exhaust this claim in his appeal to the National Appeals Board, he is precluded from raising it by a habeas petition. See Ruviwat v. Smith, 701 F.2d 844, 845 (9th Cir.1983) (per curiam).

Joseph next argues that the Commission’s finding that he conspired to steal aircraft valued at $4.5 million was arbitrary and capricious. Given the ample evidence supporting the Commission’s finding, the Commission’s finding was within its discretion, and is not subject to judicial review. See Delancy v. Crabtree, 131 F.3d 780, 788 (9th Cir.1997).

Joseph’s third contention is that the Commission was without jurisdiction to issue a warrant for parole violation because it…