
    Rodetrick Lamont GODFREY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. DIRECTOR OF DEPT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 16-7294
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: December 20, 2016
    Decided: December 22, 2016
    Rodetrick Lamont Godfrey, Appellant Pro Se. Alice Theresa Armstrong, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and WYNN and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rodetrick Lamont Godfrey seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition and his motion for relief from judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2012). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Godfrey that failure to file timely 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. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). Godfrey has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, deny a certificate of appealability, and dismiss the appeal.

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.

DISMISSED .  