UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-7022
ANGELO B. HAM,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
OFFICER CAIN, SMU, Business Office, Lee Correctional
Institution; L. MILLER, Grievance Coordinator, Lee
Correctional Institution,
Defendants – Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. David C. Norton, District Judge.
(6:08-cv-01764-DCN)
Submitted: October 21, 2008 Decided: October 28, 2008
Before MICHAEL, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Angelo B. Ham, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Angelo B. Ham appeals the district court’s order
denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The
district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge
recommended that relief be denied and advised Ham 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, Ham failed to object to
the magistrate judge’s 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. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th
Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Ham
has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific
objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny
Ham’s motion for appointment of counsel and affirm the judgment
of the district court.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
2
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3