UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-7800
KINGDAWUD BURGESS,
Petitioner – Appellant,
v.
WARDEN ATKINSON, FCI Edgefield,
Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Anderson. G. Ross Anderson, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (8:13-cv-01178-GRA)
Submitted: March 28, 2014 Decided: April 4, 2014
Before KING, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kingdawud Burgess, Appellant Pro Se. Marshall Prince, II,
Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Kingdawud Majahid Burgess, a federal prisoner, appeals
the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the
magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241
(2012) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. In the report and recommendation, the
magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
Burgess that failure to file timely, specific objections to this
recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court
order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning,
Burgess failed to file specific objections 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).
Burgess has waived appellate review of his claims by failing to
file specific 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
2
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3