Kathaleen Smalls v. Barack Obama
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:16-cv-01788-BHH Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Kathaleen Smalls. [16-1927]
Pg: 1 of 2
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
KATHALEEN B. SMALLS,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
PRESIDENT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA; ASHTON B. CARTER, Secretary,
Department of Defense; LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General,
Department of Justice; UNITED STATES ARMY; UNITED STATES
MARINE CORPS; UNITED STATES NAVY; UNITED STATES ATTORNEY FOR
THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg.
Bruce H. Hendricks, District
January 31, 2017
February 2, 2017
Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kathaleen B. Smalls, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 2
denying relief on her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint.
district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant
failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could
waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the
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.
Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
Smalls has waived appellate review
by failing to file specific objections after receiving proper
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
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?