Case Name: Malik Abdul AL-SHABAZZ, a/k/a Willie L. Furtick, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC; Rickie Harrison, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution; Charles Molony Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-06-20
Citations: 67 F. App'x 221
Docket Number: No. 03-6585
Parties: Malik Abdul AL-SHABAZZ, a/k/a Willie L. Furtick, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC; Rickie Harrison, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution; Charles Molony Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
Judges: Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 67
Pages: 221–222

Head Matter:
Malik Abdul AL-SHABAZZ, a/k/a Willie L. Furtick, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Gary D. MAYNARD, Director of SCDC; Rickie Harrison, Warden of Kershaw Correctional Institution; Charles Molony Condon, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
No. 03-6585.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted June 12, 2003.
Decided June 20, 2003.
Malik Abdul Al-Shabazz, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, William Edgar Salter, III, Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Malik Abdul Al-Shabazz seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). 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 Al-Shabazz 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, Al-Shabazz 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, 845-6 (4th Cir.1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Al-Shabazz 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 the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED.