Maxton v. United States

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6443 THERON JOHNNY MAXTON, Petitioner - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-97-3811-0-6-BD) Submitted: May 28, 1998 Decided: June 10, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Theron Johnny Maxton, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Theron Johnny Maxton appeals the district court's order dis- missing without prejudice his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994). Maxton's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recom- mended that relief be denied and advised Maxton 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, Maxton failed to object to the magistrate judge's 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 generally Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Maxton has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accord- ingly, 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 * The district court erroneously stated in its order that objections were filed on September 29, 1997, but this was well before the magistrate judge issued his report and recommendation. No objections were filed after Maxton received proper notice. 2