Helene Maria Riley v. Seth Bartlett
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to dismiss appeal [999482918-2] Originating case number: 6:14-cv-00350-TMC Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Riley. [14-2235]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
HELENE MARIA RILEY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
SETH BARTLETT, IRS Field Agent,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Greenville. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge.
August 27, 2015
September 10, 2015
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Helene Maria Riley, Appellant Pro Se.
Gretchen M. Wolfinger,
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; George
John Conits, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
denying relief on her civil action against Seth Bartlett.
district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
recommended that relief be denied and advised Riley that failure
to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive
Riley filed no objections, and the district
court adopted the magistrate judge’s report.
The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate
judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review
of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have
been warned of the consequences of noncompliance.
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Riley has waived appellate
Accordingly, although we deny Bartlett’s motion to dismiss
Pg: 3 of 3
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?