Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01603/USCOURTS-ca4-10-01603-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Quintin Littlejohn
Appellant
Mummar al Qaddifi
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1603

QUINTIN LITTLEJOHN,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

MUMMAR AL QADDIFI, leader of Libya, North Africa,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Spartanburg. R. Bryan Harwell, District 

Judge. (7:10-cv-01122-RBH)

Submitted: July 27, 2010 Decided: August 5, 2010

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and WILKINSON and KEENAN, Circuit 

Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Quintin Littlejohn, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-1603 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Quintin Littlejohn seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order dismissing his civil complaint without prejudice. 

The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). 

The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and 

advised Littlejohn that failure to file specific 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 (1985). 

Littlejohn has waived appellate review by failing to file 

specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, 

we dismiss the 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

Appeal: 10-1603 Doc: 6 Filed: 08/05/2010 Pg: 2 of 2