Opinion
22-2093
01-19-2023
KANDANCE A. WELLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER SYSTEM, Defendant-Appellee.
Kandance A. Wells, Appellant Pro Se.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: January 17, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (2:22-cv-00370)
Kandance A. Wells, Appellant Pro Se.
Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kandance A. Wells appeals the district court's order dismissing her civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 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 Wells 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). Although Wells received proper notice and filed objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation after the district court dismissed her complaint, she has waived appellate review because the objections were untimely. 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