Case ID: f-appx_671/html/0047-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Nathanael Lenard REYNOLDS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Chief Deputy Dudley MUSIER; Officer Watson, Defendants-Appellees, and Sheriff Michael Johnson, Defendant.
    No. 16-7025
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: November 18, 2016
    Decided: November 23, 2016
    Nathanael Lenard Reynolds, Appellant Pro Se. Edgar Lloyd Willcox, II, WILL-COX BTJYCK & WILLIAMS, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Nathanael Lenard Reynolds appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Reynolds that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.

The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that' recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Reynolds has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. The motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense is denied.

AFFIRMED