Case Name: Saul WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BEAUFORT COUNTY; Beaufort County Sheriff; Michael Reynolds, Inv., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-10-03
Citations: 144 F. App'x 985
Docket Number: No. 05-6991
Parties: Saul WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BEAUFORT COUNTY; Beaufort County Sheriff; Michael Reynolds, Inv., Defendants—Appellees.
Judges: Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 144
Pages: 985–985

Head Matter:
Saul WILLIAMS, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BEAUFORT COUNTY; Beaufort County Sheriff; Michael Reynolds, Inv., Defendants—Appellees.
No. 05-6991.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Sept. 27, 2005.
Decided Oct. 3, 2005.
Saul Williams, Appellant pro se. Isaac McDuffie Stone, III, Marshall Hodges Waldron, Jr., Law Office of Duffle Stone, LLC, Bluffton, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Saul Williams appeals the district court's order dismissing 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 Williams 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, Williams failed to object 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). Williams 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED