Mary Anderson v. First Citizens Bank ( 2023 )

USCA4 Appeal: 23-1964 Doc: 9 Filed: 12/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-1964
MARY E. ANDERSON,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
FIRST CITIZENS BANK,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Columbia. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (3:22-cv-02195-MGL)
Submitted: December 19, 2023 Decided: December 21, 2023
Before HARRIS, QUATTLEBAUM, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary E. Anderson, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Buckley, FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-1964 Doc: 9 Filed: 12/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM:
Mary Anderson appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action. 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 Anderson 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). Anderson 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