*2 Before HULL, DUBINA, Circuit Judges, and RESTANI, ^[*] Judge.

PER CURIAM:

Plaintiff-Appellant Arnaldo Ravelo brought this civil action under 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq. and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. After review and with the benefit of oral argument, this Court concludes that Ravelo has not shown any reversible error in the district court’s final judgment and order dated November 30, 2016. Thus, we affirm the district court’s decision for the reasons already outlined in the district court’s order. ^[1]

AFFIRMED.

[*] Honorable Jane A. Restani, Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.

[1] This Court sua sponte has considered its jurisdiction and concludes that, based on the record and the narrow issue of statutory ineligibility for adjustment of status to that of a lawful permanent resident, we have subject matter jurisdiction in this case. See Perez v. U.S. Bureau of Citizenship & Immigration Servs., 774 F.3d 960, 965–66 (11th Cir. 2014); Mejia Rodriguez v. U.S. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., 562 F.3d 1137, 1142–43 (11th Cir. 2009). 2