Jimmy Wagoner v. Warden Berkerbil , 500 F. App'x 221 ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-7287
JIMMY WAGONER,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
WARDEN BERKERBIL; TERRY O’BRIEN,
Respondents – Appellees,
and
BUREAU OF PRISONS; SLONE, Case Manager; OUSLEY, Case
Manager,
Respondents.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge. (1:11-cv-00172-IMK-JSK)
Submitted: December 13, 2012 Decided: December 18, 2012
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jimmy Wagoner, Appellant Pro Se. Jarod James Douglas, Assistant
United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jimmy Wagoner appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2241 (West 2006 & Supp.
2012) petition. The district court referred this case to a
magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B)
(West 2006 & Supp. 2012). The magistrate judge recommended that
relief be denied and advised Wagoner that failure to file timely
and specific 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).
Wagoner has waived appellate review by failing to file specific
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