Christina Alexandria Taylor-Loper v. Sam’s Club/walmart Associates, Inc.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 24-1192
CHRISTINA ALEXANDRIA TAYLOR-LOPER,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SAM’S CLUB/WALMART ASSOCIATES, INC.,
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-cv-00361-M-RJ)
Submitted: September 26, 2024 Decided: October 3, 2024
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and BERNER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Christina Alexandria Taylor-Loper, Appellant Pro Se. Jose Rodrigo Pocasangre, Winston-
Salem, North Carolina, Shannon Sumerell Spainhour, CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH
& PROPHETE, LLP, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Christina Alexandria Taylor-Loper appeals the district court’s order dismissing her
complaint brought pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended,
42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 2000e-17. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The magistrate judge recommended that the case be
dismissed and advised Taylor-Loper 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 judge’s 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 (1985). Taylor-Loper has forfeited appellate
review by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s 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

-- 2 of 2 --