Moshe Aitch v. Denise Maybin, No. 08-7835 (4th Cir. 2009)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-7835 MOSHE DAYAN AITCH, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. DENISE LECHELE MAYBIN; ANETRA LASHUN SMITH; TUWANA WILLIAMS, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (9:08-cv-02242-HMH) Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: April 30, 2009 Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Moshe Dayan Aitch, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Moshe Dayan Aitch appeals the district court s order dismissing without complaint. prejudice The district his court 42 U.S.C. referred § 1983 this (2006) case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Aitch that failure to file timely specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order warning, based Aitch upon failed the to recommendation. file specific Despite objections this to the magistrate judge s recommendation. The magistrate timely judge s filing of recommendation specific is objections necessary to to a preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have noncompliance. been warned of the consequences of Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Aitch has waived appellate review by failing to timely file specific objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.