UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-6655
MATTHEW THOMAS PICKENS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF
INVESTIGATION,
Defendants - Appellees,
and
JANICE GALLI MCLEOD, Associate Director of the USDOJ; KEVIN
FRANK MCDONALD, Assistant US Attorney,
Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District
Judge. (2:11-cv-01168-RBH)
Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 1, 2012
Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Matthew Thomas Pickens, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Murcier
Bowens, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Matthew Thomas Pickens appeals from the district
court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation
and denying relief on his civil action based on the Freedom of
Information Act (“FOIA”). A party who fails to file specific
written objections within ten days waives the right to an
appeal. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.
1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 93-94 (4th Cir.
1984). The requirement to make objections preserves the
district court’s role as the primary supervisor of magistrate
judges, Wright, 766 F.2d at 845, and conserves judicial
resources by training the attention of both the district court
and the court of appeals upon only those issues that remain in
dispute after the magistrate judge has made findings and
recommendations. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147-48 (1985).
While Pickens timely objected to some portions of the
magistrate judge’s report, he did not object to the sole issue
he raises on appeal: that the magistrate judge improperly found
the Defendants withheld some information because of certain FOIA
exemptions. ∗ If a party does not file specific written
objections to a proposed finding of fact or conclusion of law,
∗
We only address issues properly raised in Pickens’
informal brief. 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
2
then the party is deemed to have waived his right to appellate
review of that particular finding of fact or conclusion of law
by the district court. United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616,
621-22 (4th Cir. 2007). This “general waiver rule” is also
applicable to general objections to a report and recommendation
as a whole. Id. Thus, in order to preserve for appeal an issue
in a magistrate judge’s report, a party must object to the
finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient
specificity so as to reasonably alert the district court of the
true ground for the objection. Id. As noted by the district
court, Pickens failed to object to the magistrate judge’s
finding that Defendants properly withheld some information
because of FOIA exemptions. Thus, Pickens has waived appellate
review of this claim.
Accordingly, Pickens has waived appellate review of
his sole issue raised on appeal and we therefore dismiss. 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.
DISMISSED
3