
    Marie ASSA’AD-FALTAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COLUMBIA, The CITY OF, SOUTH CAROLINA; Members of the City’s Council; J. Steadly Bogan, Judge for Columbia’s Municipal Court, solely in their official capacities and solely for injunctive relief; Dana Davis Turner, Chief Administrator of the City’s Municipal Court; Officer Hampe; Officer Kahl; Robert G. Cooper, Bob; David A. Fernandez; Assistant City Attorneys for the City; Deandrea Gist Benjamin, and all other presently unknown persons and entities necessary for adjudication of this case in both their official and individual capacities, Defendants-Appellees. Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, MD MPH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Alan Wilson, Attorney General of South Carolina; Glenn McConnell, President pro tempore of South Carolina’s Senate and Chair of South Carolina’s Judicial Merit Selection Commission solely in their official capacities and solely for injunctive relief; Jean H. Toal, The Honorable Chief Justice of South Carolina solely in her ceremonial capacity and solely for injunctive relief, Defendants-Appellees. Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, Petitioner-Appellant, v. State of South Carolina, The; Alan Wilson, Attorney General; Warden, Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center; Columbia, The City of, South Carolina, Respondents-Appellees.
    Nos. 11-1939, 11-1940, 11-1941.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: April 26, 2012.
    Decided: April 30, 2012.
    Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before GREGORY, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
   PER CURIAM:

In these consolidated appeals, Marie Therese Assa’ad-Faltas appeals from the district court’s judgments dismissing her several actions against Defendants. Her claims were referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2006). The magistrate judge recommended that the district court dismiss her actions. Assa’ad-Faltas filed objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendations, but the district court accepted the recommendations and dismissed her actions.

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 that failure to file specific objections will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir.1985). We have limited our review to the issues raised in Assa’ad-Faltas’s informal briefs, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b), and to the extent Assa’ad-Faltas filed specific objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendations, we affirm the district court’s judgments. See Assa’ad-Faltas v. Columbia, SC, No. 3:10-cv-03294-TLW, 2011 WL 3417836 (D.S.C. Aug. 3, 2011); Assa’ad-Faltas v. Wilson, No. 3:11-cv-00278-TLW (D.S.C. July 28, 2011); Assa’ad-Faltas v. South Carolina, No. 3:11-cv-00809-TLW (D.S.C. filed July 27, 2011; entered July 28, 2011). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED.  