Kandance Wells v. Charleston Area Medical Center System
Kandance Wells v. Charleston Area Medical Center System
Opinion
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2093 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/19/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-2093
KANDANCE A. WELLS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CHARLESTON AREA MEDICAL CENTER SYSTEM, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (2:22-cv-00370)
Submitted: January 17, 2023 Decided: January 19, 2023
Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Kandance A. Wells, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-2093 Doc: 14 Filed: 01/19/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
PER CURIAM: Kandance A. Wells appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Wells that failure to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
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, 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154-55 (1985). Although Wells received proper notice and filed objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after the district court dismissed her complaint, she has waived appellate review because the objections were untimely. 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 before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.