David Bach v. South Carolina Government , 589 F. App'x 134 ( 2014 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1596
DAVID BACH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
SOUTH CAROLINA GOVERNMENT; EDWARD CHRISCOE, Public
Defender,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge.
(4:14-cv-00073-MGL)
Submitted: October 2, 2014 Decided: December 31, 2014
Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David Bach, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Bach appeals the district court’s order denying
relief on his complaint. The district court referred this case
to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)
(2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied
and advised Bach 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). Bach
has waived appellate review by failing to file 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
2