PER CURIAM:
Shannon Harris, federal prisoner # 16186-179, appeals the dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition in which he claimed that he is actually innocent of his sentencing enhancement and that 28 U.S.C. § 2255’s savings clause permitted him to bring this claim in a § 2241 petition. Harris is not required to obtain a certificate of appealability. See Padilla v. United States, 416 F.3d 424, 425 (5th Cir. 2005).
When Harris filed his claim for relief in the Southern District of Texas, he was incarcerated in Kentucky. The district court thus lacked jurisdiction to consider the § 2241 petition because Harris was required to bring it in the district where he was confined. See Padilla, 416 F.3d at 426; Lee v. Wetzel, 244 F.3d 370, 373 (5th Cir. 2001).
Accordingly, the judgment of dismissal .is AFFIRMED. Harris’s motion for release pending appeal is DENIED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.