Narseal Batiste v. Federal Bureau of Prison

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:13-cv-13565 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999499188]. Mailed to: Narseal Batiste. [14-7231]

Appeal: 14-7231

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7231

NARSEAL BATISTE,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et. al.; JOEL ZIEGLER, Warden,
FCI Beckley, officially and in his individual capacity; DR.
DOMINICK MCLAIN, D.O. Clinical Director, officially and in
his individual capacity; KEVIN THOMPSON, Health Services
Administrator, officially and in his individual capacity;
JOHN AND JANE DOES A - Z, also in their official and
individual capacities,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Beckley.
Irene C. Berger,
District Judge. (5:13-cv-13565)

Submitted:

December 18, 2014

Decided:

December 23, 2014

Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Narseal Batiste, Appellant Pro Se.
Stephen Michael Horn,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7231

Doc: 14

Filed: 12/23/2014

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Narseal Batiste seeks to appeal the district court’s
order denying his motion for a temporary restraining order and a
preliminary

injunction,

and

dismissing

his

complaint

filed

pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of
Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).
this

case

to

a

magistrate

§ 636(b)(1)(B) (2012).

The district court referred

judge

pursuant

to

28

U.S.C.

The magistrate judge recommended that

relief be denied and advised Batiste 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.
Cir.

1985);

see

been

warned

of

the

consequences

of

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

Thomas

v.

Arn,

474

U.S.

140

(1985).

Batiste has waived appellate review by failing to timely file
objections after receiving proper notice.
Batiste

also

seeks

to

appeal

the

district

court’s

order denying his motion to submit untimely objections to the
magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

With respect to

this order, we have independently reviewed the record and find
no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons
2

Appeal: 14-7231

stated

Doc: 14

by

the

Filed: 12/23/2014

district

Pg: 3 of 3

court.

Batiste

v.

Fed.

Bureau

of

Prisons, No. 5:13-cv-13565 (S.D.W. Va. July 21, 2014, Aug. 7,
2014).
legal
before

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

3