Narseal Batiste v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, No. 14-7231 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-7231 NARSEAL BATISTE, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, et. al.; JOEL ZIEGLER, Warden, FCI Beckley, officially and in his individual capacity; DR. DOMINICK MCLAIN, D.O. Clinical Director, officially and in his individual capacity; KEVIN THOMPSON, Health Services Administrator, officially and in his individual capacity; JOHN AND JANE DOES A - Z, also in their official and individual capacities, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Irene C. Berger, District Judge. (5:13-cv-13565) Submitted: December 18, 2014 Decided: December 23, 2014 Before SHEDD, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Narseal Batiste, Appellant Pro Se. Stephen Michael Horn, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Narseal Batiste seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction, and dismissing his complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). this case to a magistrate § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The district court referred judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Batiste that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could 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 have noncompliance. Cir. 1985); see been warned of the consequences of Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Batiste has waived appellate review by failing to timely file objections after receiving proper notice. Batiste also seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to submit untimely objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. With respect to this order, we have independently reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons 2 stated by the district court. Batiste v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, No. 5:13-cv-13565 (S.D.W. Va. July 21, 2014, Aug. 7, 2014). legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. AFFIRMED 3