Case Name: Carol L. HALL, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Timothy CHAMPAYNE, Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-07-23
Citations: 474 F. App'x 393
Docket Number: No. 12-1459
Parties: Carol L. HALL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Timothy CHAMPAYNE, Defendant—Appellee.
Judges: Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 474
Pages: 393–394

Head Matter:
Carol L. HALL, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Timothy CHAMPAYNE, Defendant—Appellee.
No. 12-1459.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 19, 2012.
Decided: July 23, 2012.
Carol L. Hall, Appellant Pro Se.
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Carol L. Hall seeks to appeal the district court's order adopting the magistrate judge's report and recommendation and dismissing without prejudice her complaint against an employee of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. 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 dismissing the complaint and advised Hall that failure to file timely and 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, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Hall has waived appellate review by failing to file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment.
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.