Marcus Griffin v. Angie Graves, No. 12-7247 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-7247 MARCUS GRIFFIN, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. ANGIE GRAVES, IGC official capacity; ANNIE MAE official capacity; LIEUTENANT JAMES MARTIN, capacity; MS. PAMELA MCDOWELL, official capacity, SELLERS, official Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (4:12-cv-01163-CMC) Submitted: October 11, 2012 Decided: October 16, 2012 Before KING, DUNCAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Marcus Griffin, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Marcus Griffin seeks to appeal the district court s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and summarily dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) action. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1)(B) (West 2006 & Supp. 2012). magistrate action judge and recommended advised summarily Griffin that dismissing failure to The Griffin s file timely objections to the recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance Midgette, Collins, 478 Thomas v. 766 Arn, of that recommendation. United States v. Wright v. F.3d 616, 621-22 (4th Cir. 2007); F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); U.S. 140, 474 155 (1985). see Because also Griffin received notice of the consequences of a failure to object to the magistrate judge s report and yet failed to do so, he has waived appellate review. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. legal We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.
