first proffered in the motion to withdraw, fails for several reasons. First, King waived this issue. He tries to avoid waiver by framing his claim of actual innocence as a non-waivable jurisdictional defect, but his effort fails because all federal courts have jurisdiction to hear criminal cases arising under federal statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 2241(c). 18 U.S.C. § 3231; see also United States v. Polin, 323 F.2d 549, 556 (3d Cir.1963). As we have explained, challenges to the appropriate district court are actually challenges to venue. United States v. Robinson, 167 F.3d 824, 829 (3d Cir.1999). By pleading guilty in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, King waived any claim of improper venue. See Washington v. Sobina, 475 F.3d 162, 165 (3d Cir.2007) (<HOLDING>). Second, even had King preserved the argument,
holding entry of a guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional issues holding that a valid guilty plea waives a statute of limitations defense holding entry of guilty plea waives challenges to the deprivation of constitutional rights that occurred prior to the entry of the guilty plea  emphasis added holding that a voluntary guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings recognizing that a voluntary and understanding guilty plea entered without the benefit of a plea bargain waives all nonjurisdictional defects that occurred before the entry of the plea