Case Name: Wayne A. WILLIAMS-EL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT; United States District Court; 4th Circuit Court of Appeals; United States Supreme Court, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-02
Citations: 517 F. App'x 152
Docket Number: No. 12-7998
Parties: Wayne A. WILLIAMS-EL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT; United States District Court; 4th Circuit Court of Appeals; United States Supreme Court, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 517
Pages: 152–152

Head Matter:
Wayne A. WILLIAMS-EL, Petitioner-Appellant, v. SUPERIOR COURT; United States District Court; 4th Circuit Court of Appeals; United States Supreme Court, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 12-7998.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: March 28, 2013.
Decided: April 2, 2013.
Wayne A. Williams-El, Appellant Pro Se.
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Wayne A. Williams-El seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp.2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Williams-El 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). Williams-El has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
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.
DISMISSED.