Flemmings v. Verizon Wireless ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-1709
    GENORA FLEMMINGS,
    Plaintiff - Appellant,
    v.
    VERIZON WIRELESS,
    Defendant - Appellee.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Greenville.      R. Bryan Harwell, District
    Judge. (6:09-cv-02220-RBH)
    Submitted:   October 14, 2010              Decided:   October 20, 2010
    Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Genora Flemmings, Appellant Pro Se.      William H. Floyd,       III,
    NEXSEN PRUET, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Genora       Flemmings      appeals      the    district     court’s      order
    accepting       the    recommendation         of     the    magistrate        judge       and
    granting    Defendant’s          motion     for    sanctions      and   dismissing        the
    complaint       for   failure      to   comply      with    discovery     orders.          We
    affirm.
    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
    (4th Cir. 2007); Wright v. Collins, 
    766 F.2d 841
    , 845-46 (4th
    Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 
    474 U.S. 140
    , 155 (1985).
    Flemmings       has   waived       appellate       review    by     failing     to    file
    objections after receiving proper notice.
    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    the    court     and     argument       would    not   aid    the    decisional
    process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-1709

Filed Date: 10/20/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021