Filed: Aug. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6429 CHRIS A. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. MCKOY, Superintendent; MR. JOHNSON, Superintendent; CAPTAIN SOUTHHALL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03199-D) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-6429 CHRIS A. JONES, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. T. MCKOY, Superintendent; MR. JOHNSON, Superintendent; CAPTAIN SOUTHHALL, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03199-D) Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019 Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge. A..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 19-6429
CHRIS A. JONES,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
T. MCKOY, Superintendent; MR. JOHNSON, Superintendent; CAPTAIN
SOUTHHALL,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:16-ct-03199-D)
Submitted: August 20, 2019 Decided: August 23, 2019
Before FLOYD and RUSHING, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chris A. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Alan Dale McInnes, NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Chris A. Jones appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (2012) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that
relief be denied and advised Jones 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. Wright v. Collins,
766
F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn,
474 U.S. 140 (1985). Jones has
waived appellate review by failing to file 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 before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
2