Michael Poore v. Department of Veterans Affair, No. 11-6430 (4th Cir. 2011)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-6430 MICHAEL LEONARD POORE, Plaintiff Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, The VA; PATRICIA O. PITTMAN, Director of Dorn, VA Facility, Defendants Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Richard Mark Gergel, District Judge. (6:11-cv-00222-RMG) Submitted: June 16, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge. GREGORY, Decided: Circuit Judges, June 21, 2011 and HAMILTON, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael Leonard Poore, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Michael Leonard Poore appeals the district court s order dismissing his civil complaint against Defendants. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2010). The magistrate judge recommended that the complaint be dismissed and advised Poore that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation would waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the 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 noncompliance. have 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). Poore has waived appellate review by failing to file 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.