DocketNumber: 20-6626
Filed Date: 9/29/2020
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 9/29/2020
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6626 ROBERT ALLAN BARR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DELLINGER; TURNER; BLUE; GLOVER; HUERTAS; CAPLE; HEYERTAS; ROBBINS; HEAD NURSE LOCKAMY; INAM HINTON; JACQUELINE POINSETT; NICOLE SPRUELL; JENNIFER B. ALMOND; DESEREE MCGHEE; ANGELA DELLARIPA; SARAHE MCLUCAS; SHERYL HATCHER; YOLANDA GAUSE; WAKENDA GREENE; FAUSTINA F. BROWN; DEAN LOCKLEAR; PAMELA LOCKLEAR; CRAWFORD; V-MILSAP; RAY, Defendants - Appellees. No. 20-6660 ROBERT ALLAN BARR, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CO- STAFF; CO DELLINGER; CO SHAFFER; CO TURNER; CASE MANAGER CRAWFORD; CO BLUE; OFFICER AT HOKE; CASE MANAGER V. MILSAP; CO ROBINSON, Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:20-cv-00215-LCB-JLW; 1:20-cv-00155- LCB-JLW) Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 29, 2020 Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert Allan Barr, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: In these consolidated appeals, Robert Allan Barr appeals the district court’s orders denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaints. The district court referred these cases to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied in both actions and advised Barr that failure to file timely, specific objections to these recommendations could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendations. 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). Barr has waived appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendations after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments 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 3