Jones v. South Carolina

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6323 WILLIE JAMES JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; YORK COUNTY; YORK COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT; CHESTER COUNTY; CHESTER COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-01-4590-2-23) Submitted: June 20, 2002 Decided: June 26, 2002 Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Willie James Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Willie Jones, a South Carolina inmate, appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint. Jones’s case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Jones that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Jones failed to object to the magistrate judges recommendation. The timely filing of 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). Jones 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