Mary Penland v. US

Filing 920090319

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-2326

MARY PENLAND, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (6:07-cv-03977-HMH)

Submitted:

March 17, 2009

Decided:

March 19, 2009

Before TRAXLER, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mary Penland, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Mary dismissing her Penland civil appeals the district the United court's States. order The

action

against

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge

recommended that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for Penland's failure to perfect service of process and advised Penland that failure to file specific objections to this

recommendation would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon object the to recommendation. the dispositive Penland portion did of not the

specifically

recommendation. The magistrate timely filing of specific is objections to to a

judge's

recommendation

necessary

preserve

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of

noncompliance.

United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616, 621-22

(4th Cir. 2007); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Penland has waived appellate review by failing to file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we

affirm the judgment of the district court.

Further, we deny

Penland's motion to void her plea agreement with the Government. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. AFFIRMED

3