Decota Brown appeals the district courts order dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e), 1915A.
*
The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the complaint and advised Brown that failure to file timely, specific objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation.
The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judges recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned of the consequences of noncompliance. Martin v. Duffy, 858 F.3d 239, 245 (4th Cir. 2017); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 846-47 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154-55, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Brown has waived appellate review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judges recommendation after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
FOOTNOTES
FOOTNOTE
. Although the district court dismissed Browns action without prejudice, the dismissal order is a final, appealable order. See Bing v. Brivo Sys., LLC, 959 F.3d 605, 612 (4th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 141 S. Ct. 1376, 209 L.Ed.2d 122 (2021).
PER CURIAM:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.