Taii-ko Monteiro-Bells v. Paul DeHoll

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2189 Doc: 6 Filed: 03/30/2026 Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-2189

MRS. TAII-KO MONTEIRO-BELLS, f/k/a Taii-ko Monteiro, et al, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DR. PAUL DOUGLAS DEHOLL, M.D., et al, Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:25-cv-09583-JFA)

Submitted: March 26, 2026 Decided: March 30, 2026

Before RICHARDSON and BERNER, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Taii-ko Monteiro-Bells, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 25-2189 Doc: 6 Filed: 03/30/2026 Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM: Taii-ko Monteiro-Bells appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil action for lack of jurisdiction. 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 the action be dismissed and advised Monteiro-Bells that failure to file timely and specific objections to this recommendation would 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). Monteiro-Bells has forfeited appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving proper notice. 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