James Dator v. Warden Joseph McFadden , 692 F. App'x 731 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-7404
    JAMES R. DATOR,
    Petitioner - Appellant,
    v.
    WARDEN JOSEPH MCFADDEN, Lieber Corr Inst,
    Respondent - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Aiken.
    Margaret B. Seymour, Senior District Judge. (1:15-cv-01698-MBS)
    Submitted: June 27, 201                                            Decided: July 6, 2017
    Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    James R. Dator, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Attorney General,
    James Anthony Mabry, Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    James R. Dator seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
    U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. 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 Dator that failure to file timely objections to this
    recommendation would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the
    recommendation. However, Dator filed no objections to 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). Dator
    has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice.
    Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal.
    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.
    DISMISSED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-7404

Citation Numbers: 692 F. App'x 731

Judges: Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Shedd, Wynn

Filed Date: 7/6/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024