Sherman v. McCrorey , 101 F. App'x 406 ( 2004 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-1195
CURLEE SHERMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE HONORABLE JOSEPH R. MCCROREY,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 04-1258
CURLEE SHERMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
JOSEPH R. MCCROREY,
Defendant - Appellee.
No. 04-1282
CURLEE SHERMAN,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
THE HONORABLE JOSEPH R. MCCROREY,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.
(CA-04-119-3-2-24BD; CA-04-312-3)
Submitted: June 9, 2004 Decided: June 25, 2004
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Curlee Sherman, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -
PER CURIAM:
Curlee Sherman seeks to appeal the district court’s
orders dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaints. The
district court referred these cases to a magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). In each case the magistrate
judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Sherman that
failure to file timely, specific objections to the recommendation
could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon
the recommendation. Despite this warning, Sherman failed to
specifically object to the magistrate judge’s 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 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 (1985). Sherman has waived appellate
review by failing to file specific objections after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma
pauperis and dismiss the appeals.
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.
DISMISSED
- 3 -