Opinion ID: 169599
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: W aiver of appellate review

Text: “[W]e have adopted a firm waiver rule when a party fails to object to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate [judge].” M oore v. United States, 950 F.2d 656, 659 (10th Cir. 1991). Under our “firm waiver rule,” a party who fails to file timely objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation waives appellate review. Wirsching v. Colorado, 360 F.3d 1191, 1197 (10th Cir. 2004) (internal quotation marks omitted). The firm waiver rule, however, does not apply (1) when a pro se litigant was not notified of the time period for filing an objection and the consequences for failing to do so, (2) when the interests of justice warrant, or (3) when the party that failed to object makes a showing of plain error. See Wardell v. Duncan, 470 F.3d 954, 958 (10th Cir. 2006); M orales-Fernandez v. INS, 418 F.3d 1116, 1119 -2- (10th Cir. 2005); Wirsching, 360 F.3d at 1197. M r. M addox maintains that he did not receive notification of the Report and Recommendation, and he attached a document that he maintains is the Oklahoma State Reformatory mail log for the months of M arch and April 2007, which indicates the only correspondence he received from the district court was the order dismissing his complaint. Because M r. M addox makes a colorable claim that he did not receive notice of the time period for filing an objection, we will address the merits.