Patrick Guess v. John McGill

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to appoint counsel [999503605-2]; denying Motion to dismiss appeal [999472749-2]; granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (FRAP 24) [999480172-2] Originating case number: 9:13-cv-02260-TLW Copies to all parties and the district court. [999513981]. Mailed to: Patrick Guess. [14-7591]

Appeal: 14-7591

Doc: 24

Filed: 01/21/2015

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7591

PATRICK GUESS,
Plaintiff – Appellant,
and
TONY SPEARMAN; JESSE FREDERICK; WILLIE MONTGOMERY; WILLIAM
JOHNSON,
Plaintiffs,
v.
JOHN MCGILL, Director of SCDMH; HOLLY SCATURO, Director of
SVPTP; ROBERT STEVENSON, III, Warden of BRCI; WILLIAM BYARS,
Director of SCDOC; SCDOC CHAPLIN SERVICES,
Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Beaufort.
Terry L. Wooten, Chief District
Judge. (9:13-cv-02260-TLW)

Submitted:

January 15, 2015

Decided:

January 21, 2015

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Appeal: 14-7591

Doc: 24

Filed: 01/21/2015

Pg: 2 of 4

Patrick Guess, Appellant Pro Se.
Andrew Lindemann, DAVIDSON &
LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

Appeal: 14-7591

Doc: 24

Filed: 01/21/2015

Pg: 3 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Patrick

Guess

appeals

the

district

court’s

order

dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) action.
The

district

court

referred

this

case

to

a

magistrate

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012).

judge

The magistrate

judge recommended that the action be dismissed and advised Guess
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).

Guess

has forfeited appellate review by failing to 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

We also grant Guess leave to proceed in forma pauperis and
deny Appellee’s motion to dismiss and Guess’ motion for
appointment of counsel.

3

Appeal: 14-7591

before

Doc: 24

this

court

Filed: 01/21/2015

and

Pg: 4 of 4

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
AFFIRMED

4