UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6626

ROBERT ALLAN BARR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

DELLINGER; TURNER; BLUE; GLOVER; HUERTAS; CAPLE; HEYERTAS; ROBBINS; HEAD NURSE LOCKAMY; INAM HINTON; JACQUELINE POINSETT; NICOLE SPRUELL; JENNIFER B. ALMOND; DESEREE MCGHEE; ANGELA DELLARIPA; SARAHE MCLUCAS; SHERYL HATCHER; YOLANDA GAUSE; WAKENDA GREENE; FAUSTINA F. BROWN; DEAN LOCKLEAR; PAMELA LOCKLEAR; CRAWFORD; V-MILSAP; RAY,

Defendants - Appellees.

No. 20-6660

ROBERT ALLAN BARR,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CO- STAFF; CO DELLINGER; CO SHAFFER; CO TURNER; CASE MANAGER CRAWFORD; CO BLUE; OFFICER AT HOKE; CASE MANAGER V. MILSAP; CO ROBINSON,

Defendants - Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:20-cv-00215-LCB-JLW; 1:20-cv-00155- LCB-JLW)

Submitted: September 24, 2020 Decided: September 29, 2020

Before HARRIS and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Allan Barr, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Robert Allan Barr appeals the district court’s orders

denying relief on his

complaints. The district court referred these cases

to a magistrate judge pursuant to

(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge

recommended that relief be denied in both actions and advised Barr that failure to file

timely, specific objections to these recommendations could waive appellate review of a

district court order based upon the recommendations.

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. Martin v. Duffy,

(4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins,

(4th Cir. 1985); see

also Thomas v. Arn,

(1985). Barr has waived appellate review by

failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendations after receiving proper

notice.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the district court. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3