Clayton Tisdale v. South Carolina Highway Patrol

Filing 920090827

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-7059

CLAYTON HOWARD TISDALE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. SOUTH CAROLINA HIGHWAY PATROL; R. D. TREVATHON, Conway, SC Highway 701 N Conway SC 29526, Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (0:09-cv-01009-HFF)

Submitted:

August 20, 2009

Decided:

August 27, 2009

Before WILKINSON and Senior Circuit Judge.

MICHAEL,

Circuit

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clayton Howard Tisdale, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Clayton Howard Tisdale appeals the district court's

order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. The 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 relief be denied and advised Tisdale that failure to file timely and specific objections to this

recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the to recommendation. object to the Despite this warning, judge's

Tisdale

failed

magistrate

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. Cir. 1985); has see

Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th also Thomas appellate v. Arn, 474 by U.S. 140 (1985). to file we

Tisdale

waived

review

failing

objections

after

receiving

proper

notice.

Accordingly,

affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional

would

process. AFFIRMED 2