Joan Cicchiello v. Slinka

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 26-1006

JOAN CICCHIELLO,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

MS. SLINKA, Individually and official capacity,

Defendant – Appellee,

and

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Party-in -Interest – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at
Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh, District Judge. (3:24-cv -00152-GMG)

Submitted: July 23, 2026 Decided: July 27, 2026

Before WYNN and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joan Cicchiello, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2

PER CURIAM:
Joan Cicchiello seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the magistrate
judge’s recommendation to dismiss her complaint. 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 because the claims were barred by res judicata.
The magistrate judge advised Cicchiello that failure to file timely, specific objections to
the 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). Cicchiello has forfeited appellate review
by failing to file objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation after receiving
proper notice. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the materials before this court and would not aid the decisional
process.
DISMISSED