Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

93 F. App'x 515

Putman v. Wal-Mart

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Decided March 30, 2004

U.S. Courts of Appeals · decided 2004-03-30

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 636 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Thomas v. Arn · Wright v. Collins

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion · Decided 2004-03-30

*516 PER CURIAM:

¶1 Linda Ann Putman appeals the district court’s order dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Putman that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Putman failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.

¶2 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Putman has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.

¶3 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

¶4 AFFIRMED

/93/fappx/515 · .json · Public domain