Case ID: f-appx_73/html/0600-01.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

Jackie LOGAN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. State of SOUTH CAROLINA; Governor’s Office; Senate and House of South Carolina, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-6794.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Aug. 5, 2003.
    Decided Aug. 25, 2003.
    
      Jackie Logan, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Jackie Logan appeals the district court’s order dismissing without his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Logan that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Logan failed to present sufficiently specific objections to the magistrate judge’s 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. See 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). Logan has waived appellate review by failing to file sufficiently specific objections after receiving proper notice. Logan’s objections were wholly conclusory in nature. Accordingly, we dismiss his appeal.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED.