Case Name: Quintin M. LITTLEJOHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, with all agents in active concert both individually and in their official capacity, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-09-04
Citations: 539 F. App'x 147
Docket Number: No. 13-6722
Parties: Quintin M. LITTLEJOHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, with all agents in active concert both individually and in their official capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 539
Pages: 147–148

Head Matter:
Quintin M. LITTLEJOHN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, with all agents in active concert both individually and in their official capacity, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 13-6722.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Aug. 29, 2013.
Decided: Sept. 4, 2013.
Quintín Littlejohn, Appellant pro se.
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Quintín Littlejohn appeals the district court's order denying relief on his civil complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp.2013). 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, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Littlejohn 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.