REBECCA THERESA, Family Name Kalfa / Sui Juris one of we the people Moving Party Of… v. Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing, their Trustees

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 26-1102
REBECCA THERESA, Family Name Kalfa / Sui Juris one of we the people
Moving Party Of Real Interest For Estate of Ralph P. Deangelis,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
SHELLPOINT MORTGAGE SERVICING, their Trustees and their Principals;
CORPORATE OFFICER R.N.E.S.; MARK FOLEY; WHITNEY WINCE,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Greenville. Jacquelyn Denise Austin, District Judge. (6:25-cv-12979-JDA)
Submitted: May 28, 2026 Decided: June 2, 2026
Before WYNN, QUATTLEBAUM, and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Rebecca Theresa, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 2 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Rebecca Theresa appeals the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint
under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). 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 Theresa 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). Theresa 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 --