
    Dennis Leon SMITH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Garth L. NIESCHBURG; Larry Porter; William Michael Porter; Mark P. Manuel; John and Jane Doe, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 03-1499.
    United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.
    Sept. 8, 2004.
    Dennis Leon Smith, Campo, CO, pro se.
    Maria Teresa Fox, David R. Brougham, Hall & Evans, John A. Lizza, Denver, CO, for Defendant-Appellee.
    Before McCONNELL, HOLLOWAY, and PORFILIO, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER AND JUDGMENT

JOHN C. PORFILIO, Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.

Plaintiff Dennis Leon, Smith, proceeding pro se, filed what he described as a mandamus action directed at defendants involved with the adjudication of his various traffic violations. The case was assigned to a magistrate judge who recommended all claims against all defendants be dismissed. The magistrate judge’s recommendation, adopted by the district court, warned plaintiff, “[fjailure to make timely objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation may result in a waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the district court based on the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge.” R. Doc. 22 at 9. Plaintiff failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation and has thus waived appellate review of both the factual and legal determinations of the district court. Key Energy Res. Inc. v. Merrill (In re Key Energy Res. Inc.), 230 F.3d 1197, 1199-1200 (10th Cir. 2000). The interests of justice exception to this waiver rule is not applicable here. See id. at 1200.

This appeal is DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. 
      
       This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
     
      
      . In the documents he filed with this court, plaintiff inserts a comma in his name between "Leon” and "Smith.” For purposes of this order and judgment, we shall do the same.
     