Fred Flores, Jr. v. Robert Stevenson, III

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:11-cv-01278-TMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999009919]. Mailed to: appellant. [12-7262]

Appeal: 12-7262

Doc: 16

Filed: 12/26/2012

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7262

FRED FLORES, JR.,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
ROBERT M. STEVENSON, III, Warden; SHARONDA SUTTON, Major;
JOHN BARKLEY, Associate Warden Programs; VALERIE WHITAKER,
Classification Case Worker; PERCY JONES, Administrative
Captain,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
(2:11-cv-01278-TMC)

Submitted:

December 20, 2012

Decided:

December 26, 2012

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

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Fred Flores, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.
Nikole H. Boland, Roy F.
Laney, Damon C. Wlodarczyk, RILEY, POPE & LANEY, LLC, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 12-7262

Doc: 16

Filed: 12/26/2012

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Fred Flores, Jr., 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.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2012).

The

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

timely

judge’s

filing

of

specific

recommendation

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

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

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

waived

objections

of

appellate
after

review

receiving

by

proper

failing

to

notice.

file

Flores
specific

Accordingly,

we

affirm the judgment of the district court.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal
before

contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
2