Opinion
No. 18-6364
07-31-2018
RAYBORN J. DURAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ANTHONY G. CHARLES, M.D., Defendant - Appellee.
Rayborn J. Durand, Appellant Pro Se. Barrett Thomas Johnson, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:16-cv-00086-LCB-LPA) Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, FLOYD, Circuit Judge, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Rayborn J. Durand, Appellant Pro Se. Barrett Thomas Johnson, CRANFILL, SUMNER & HARTZOG, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Rayborn J. Durand appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Durand that failure to file timely 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. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Durand has waived appellate review by failing to file timely objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and deny Durand's motion to remand.
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