Anthony McNair v. Rocky Mount Police Department

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:10-cv-00544-FL Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998540796] [11-1036]

Anthony McNair v. Rocky Mount Police Department

Doc. 0

Case: 11-1036

Document: 9

Date Filed: 03/09/2011

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1036

ANTHONY LEE MCNAIR, Plaintiff ­ Appellant, v. ROCKY MOUNT POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant ­ Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (5:10-cv-00544-FL)

Submitted:

February 28, 2011

Decided:

March 9, 2011

Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and KING and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Anthony Lee McNair, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 11-1036

Document: 9

Date Filed: 03/09/2011

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Anthony Lee McNair appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) civil rights action. The

district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). The

magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised McNair that failure to file timely and specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 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 v. warned of the 766 Arn, consequences F.2d 474 841, U.S. of

noncompliance. (4th Cir. (1985). 1985);

Wright see

Collins, Thomas v.

845-46 155

also

140,

McNair has waived appellate review by failing to file Accordingly,

specific objections after receiving proper notice. we 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