Case Name: Calvin Lyndale GADDY, a/k/a Calvin L. Gaddy, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL; Warden Joseph McFadden; Associate Warden Blackwell, All of Under Color of State Laws, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-02
Citations: 667 F. App'x 798
Docket Number: No. 16-6383
Parties: Calvin Lyndale GADDY, a/k/a Calvin L. Gaddy, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL; Warden Joseph McFadden; Associate Warden Blackwell, All of Under Color of State Laws, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 667
Pages: 798–798

Head Matter:
Calvin Lyndale GADDY, a/k/a Calvin L. Gaddy, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL; Warden Joseph McFadden; Associate Warden Blackwell, All of Under Color of State Laws, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 16-6383
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 28, 2016
Decided: August 2, 2016
Calvin Lyndale Gaddy, Appellant Pro Se.
Before MOTZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Calvin Lyndale Gaddy 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 Gaddy that failure to file timely, specific 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, 846-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Gaddy has waived appellate review by failing to file specific 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.
AFFIRMED