USCA4 Appeal: 23-7284 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/29/2024 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-7284

ANDRED CLINTON DAVIS, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. PAUL DIAMOND; CHRISTOPHER FLEMING, Defendants - Appellees, and BETSY JIVIDEN; CARL ALDRIDGE; KEEFE LLC; SGT. BREWER; NURSE REGINA LNU, Medical; LT. DAVIS, Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Robert C. Chambers, District Judge. (3:22-cv-00150)

Submitted: July 25, 2024 Decided: July 29, 2024

Before GREGORY, HARRIS, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Andred Clinton Davis, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7284 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/29/2024 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM: Andred Clinton Davis, Jr., appeals the district court’s order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and granting Defendants Paul Diamond and Christopher Fleming’s motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute Davis’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint.

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 Davis that failure to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Defendants Diamond and Fleming move to dismiss this appeal, arguing that Davis failed to object to the magistrate judge’s 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). Davis has forfeited appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving proper notice. ∗

∗ To the extent Davis filed a letter to the district court that could be construed as objections, the letter did not raise specific objections to the magistrate judge’s report. See Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017) (holding that “to preserve for appeal an issue in a magistrate judge’s report, a party must object to the finding or recommendation on that issue with sufficient specificity so as reasonably to alert the district court of the true ground for the objection” (internal quotation marks omitted)).

USCA4 Appeal: 23-7284 Doc: 13 Filed: 07/29/2024 Pg: 3 of 3

Accordingly, we grant Defendants’ motion to dismiss the appeal, and 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