Opinion
No. 18-1406
01-22-2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; ELAINE VAN VORIS; PETER VAN VORIS; JOHN JOHNSTON, Plaintiffs - Appellees, v. JIAN-YUN DONG, a/k/a John Dong, Defendant - Appellant, and GENPHAR INC, Dr. John Dong, officer; DANHER WANG; HEUNG YEUNG YEUNG; WILLIAM T. RATLIFF, JR.; VAXIMA INC; ROBERT "TEX" S. SMALL, JR.; ESTATE OF WILLIAM T RATLIFF JR, Defendants.
Jian-Yun Dong, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth C. Warren, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina; Joseph Parkwood Griffith, Jr., JOE GRIFFITH LAW FIRM, LLC, Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, for Appellees.
UNPUBLISHED
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Bruce H. Hendricks, District Judge. (2:09-cv-00005-BHH) Before WILKINSON and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jian-Yun Dong, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth C. Warren, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina; Joseph Parkwood Griffith, Jr., JOE GRIFFITH LAW FIRM, LLC, Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:
Jian-Yun Dong appeals the district court's order and judgment adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation and granting the Relators' motion to dismiss and denying Dong's motion for legal fees. The magistrate judge advised Dong that failure to file timely objections to the report and 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. United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616, 621-22 (4th Cir. 2007). Dong has waived appellate review of the district court's order and judgment granting the motion to dismiss and denying Dong's motion for legal fees because he failed to file objections. Accordingly, we deny Dong's motion for a copy of the district court's record and affirm the court's order and judgment. 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