Adrian McCray v. Scott Lewis

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-6732 ADRIAN MCCRAY, a/k/a Adrian Miscell McCray, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. WARDEN SCOTT LEWIS; SGT. BUTLER; WARDEN CARTLEDGE; DIRECTOR BRIAN STERLING, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. (4:19-cv-00151-TMC) Submitted: August 25, 2020 Decided: August 28, 2020 Before KING and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Adrian Miscell McCray, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Adrian McCray appeals the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the complaint for failure to prosecute and advised McCray that failure to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 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. Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154-55 (1985). McCray has waived appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2