Stacey Kelly v. Nancy Berryhill

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [1000272494-2] Originating case number: 3:16-cv-00990-REP. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000318052]. Mailed to: S. Kelly. [18-1339]

Appeal: 18-1339

Doc: 8

Filed: 06/25/2018

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-1339

STACEY CLARICE BROMLEY KELLY,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
NANCY A. BERRYHILL,
Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at
Richmond. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. (3:16-cv-00990-REP)

Submitted: June 21, 2018

Decided: June 25, 2018

Before DIAZ and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stacey Clarice Bromley Kelly, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 18-1339

Doc: 8

Filed: 06/25/2018

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
After the Commissioner of Social Security denied Stacey Kelly’s application for
supplemental security income, Kelly sought judicial review in the district court. The
district court referred the matter to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended granting the Defendant’s
motion for summary judgment and advised Kelly that failure to file timely objections to
the recommendation could result in waiver of appellate review of a district court order
based on the recommendation. Despite this warning, Kelly filed no objections. The
district court adopted the recommendation, granted the Defendant’s motion for summary
judgment, and upheld the denial of benefits. Kelly appeals.
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. Wright v. Collins, 766
F.2d 841, 845–46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466,
88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Kelly has waived appellate review by failing to file objections
after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and affirm the judgment of the district court.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.

AFFIRMED
2