Derek Wragge v. North Carolina

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2031 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-2031

DEREK WILLIAM WRAGGE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. NORTH CAROLINA, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:25-cv-01084-D-KS)

Submitted: February 19, 2026 Decided: February 23, 2026

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

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Derek William Wragge, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2031 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM: Derek William Wragge appeals the district court’s order denying his application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing his case. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended denying Wragge’s application and ordering him to pay the requisite filing fee. The magistrate judge further advised Wragge that failure to file specific objections to this recommendation by June 30, 2025, could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. On June 30, Wragge filed a letter docketed as an objection to the magistrate judge’s report that appeared to address his in forma pauperis application and inability to pay the filing fee. On July 15, 2025, the district court entered an order mistakenly finding that it had not received objections or the filing fee by the prescribed deadlines. Accordingly, the court accepted the magistrate judge’s recommendation, denied Wragge’s application to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismissed his case.

First, we deny Wragge’s motion to amend his case and for appointment of counsel.

In addition, although we express no opinion regarding the merits of Wragge’s suit, we vacate the dismissal order and remand for the district court to review de novo Wragge’s timely filed objection to the magistrate judge’s report. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); United States v. De Leon-Ramirez, 925 F.3d 177, 181 (4th Cir. 2019) (noting that a district court’s failure to apply the proper standard of review warrants vacatur and remand). We dispense

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2031 Doc: 10 Filed: 02/23/2026 Pg: 3 of 3 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED