Matthew Pickens v. DOJ, No. 12-6655 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-6655 MATTHEW THOMAS PICKENS, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. UNITED STATES INVESTIGATION, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF Defendants - Appellees, and JANICE GALLI MCLEOD, Associate Director of the USDOJ; KEVIN FRANK MCDONALD, Assistant US Attorney, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (2:11-cv-01168-RBH) Submitted: September 27, 2012 Decided: October 1, 2012 Before MOTZ, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Matthew Thomas Pickens, Appellant Bowens, Assistant United States Carolina, for Appellee. Pro Se. Attorney, Barbara Murcier Columbia, South Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Matthew court s order Thomas accepting Pickens the appeals magistrate from the judge s district recommendation and denying relief on his civil action based on the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA ). A party who fails to file specific written objections ten appeal. Wright within v. days 766 Collins, waives F.2d the 841, right 845-46 to (4th an Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91, 93-94 (4th Cir. 1984). The requirement to make objections preserves the district court s role as the primary supervisor of magistrate judges, Wright, 766 F.2d at 845, and conserves judicial resources by training the attention of both the district court and the court of appeals upon only those issues that remain in dispute after the recommendations. magistrate judge has made findings and Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147-48 (1985). While Pickens timely objected to some portions of the magistrate judge s report, he did not object to the sole issue he raises on appeal: that the magistrate judge improperly found the Defendants withheld some information because of certain FOIA exemptions. If a party does not file specific written objections to a proposed finding of fact or conclusion of law, We only address issues properly informal brief. 4th Cir. R. 34(b). 2 raised in Pickens then the party is deemed to have waived his right to appellate review of that particular finding of fact or conclusion of law by the district court. United States v. Midgette, 478 F.3d 616, 621-22 (4th Cir. 2007). This general waiver rule is also applicable to general objections to a report and recommendation as a whole. in a Id. magistrate finding or Thus, in order to preserve for appeal an issue judge s report, recommendation on a party that must issue object with to the sufficient specificity so as to reasonably alert the district court of the true ground for the objection. court, Pickens failed to finding that Defendants Id. object properly because of FOIA exemptions. As noted by the district to the magistrate withheld some judge s information Thus, Pickens has waived appellate review of this claim. Accordingly, Pickens has waived appellate review his sole issue raised on appeal and we therefore dismiss. dispense with oral argument because the facts and of We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3
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.
