
    UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mutaz Abdel MOHAMED, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 02-7407.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted Dec. 19, 2002.
    Decided Dec. 31, 2002.
    
      Mutaz Abdel Mohamed, Appellant Pro Se.
    Before WILKINS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
   PER CURIAM.

Mutaz Abdel Mohamed seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Mohamed that the failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Mohamed failed to object to the magistrate judge’s 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 that failure to object will waive appellate review. See 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). Mohamed has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appeal-ability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We also deny Mohamed’s motion for appointment of counsel and his motion for reconsideration of the clerk’s order deferring action on this motion pending our review of the appeal.

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.

DISMISSED.  