Judy Smith v. Department of Veterans Affair

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:08-cv-00272-CCE-WWD Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998787853]. Mailed to: Smith. [11-1953]

Appeal: 11-1953

Document: 11

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1953

JUDY SMITH,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; JAMES B. PEAKE, Secretary
of Affairs; ERIC K. SHINSEKI,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:08-cv-00272-CCE-WWD)

Submitted:

January 26, 2012

Decided:

February 14, 2012

Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Judy Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Joan Brodish Binkley, Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Greensboro,
North
Carolina,
for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-1953

Document: 11

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Judy
the

report

accepting

Smith

summary

judgment

appeals
of

to

discrimination action.

the

the

the

district

magistrate
Defendant

court’s

judge
in

and

this

order

granting
employment

The district court referred this case to

a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West
2006

&

Supp.

2011).

The

magistrate

judge

recommended

that

relief be denied and advised Smith that failure to file timely
objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review
of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
The
magistrate

timely

judge’s

filing

of

recommendation

specific
is

objections

necessary

to

to

a

preserve

appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when
the

parties

have

noncompliance.

been

warned

of

the

consequences

of

Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th

Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).

Smith

has waived appellate review by failing to timely 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

2

Appeal: 11-1953

before

Document: 11

the

court

Date Filed: 02/14/2012

and

argument

would

Page: 3 of 3

not

aid

the

decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

3