Charlton Dowling v. Gregory Voigt ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-6748
CHARLTON JAVIER DOWLING,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
GREGORY VOIGT; J. AL CANNON, JR., Esq.; CAROLINA CENTER FOR
OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort. Richard Mark Gergel, District
Judge. (9:11-cv-00634-RMG)
Submitted: August 18, 2011 Decided: August 23, 2011
Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Charlton Javier Dowling, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Charlton Javier Dowling 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. 2011).
The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and
advised Dowling that failure to file timely objections to this
recommendation that specifically identify the portions of the
Report and Recommendation to which objections are made 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).
Dowling 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
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3