The opinion
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-6723
VERNON SAMUEL BROWN, a/k/a Vernon S. Brown,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
CORRECTIONAL OFFICER DANNY DUNBAR; SGT. ANGLA COLLINS,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(9:09-cv-00920-RBH-BM)
Submitted: December 22, 2010 Decided: January 12, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Vernon Samuel Brown, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Hodges Waldron,
Jr., GRIFFITH & SADLER, P.A., Beaufort, South Carolina, for
Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Vernon Samuel Brown appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) 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. 2010). The
magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
Brown that failure to file 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 (1985). Brown
has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after
receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of
the district court.
We deny as moot appellees’ motion to 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.
AFFIRMED
2