Barbara Curry v. Adam Steifer ( 2016 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-1141
BARBARA LINDSEY CURRY,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
ADAM STEIFER; MATTHEW FLATLOW,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:15-cv-01107-CCE-LPA)
Submitted: June 23, 2016 Decided: June 28, 2016
Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Barbara Lindsey Curry, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Barbara Lindsey Curry seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 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 Curry 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). Curry has waived appellate
review by failing to file specific objections after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis 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