Jordan Mitchell v. District Attorney ( 2022 )


Menu:
  •                                     UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 21-7603
    JORDAN NATHANIEL MITCHELL,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    DISTRICT ATTORNEY; SHERIFF ROGERS,
    Defendants - Appellees.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
    Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, Chief District Judge. (1:21-cv-00552-TDS-LPA)
    Submitted: March 24, 2022                                         Decided: April 11, 2022
    Before AGEE and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Jordan Nathaniel Mitchell, Appellant Pro Se.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Jordan Nathaniel Mitchell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 
    42 U.S.C. § 1983
     complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
    pursuant to 
    28 U.S.C. § 636
    (b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be
    denied and advised Mitchell that failure to file timely, 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. Martin v. Duffy, 
    858 F.3d 239
    , 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 
    766 F.2d 841
    , 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985); see
    also Thomas v. Arn, 
    474 U.S. 140
    , 154-55 (1985). Mitchell has waived appellate review
    by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 21-7603

Filed Date: 4/11/2022

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/13/2022