052121.U

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-2121
SUSAN SMITH,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
versus
CITY OF MARION; BOBBY GERALD, individually and
as Mayor; BOBBY DAVIS, individually and in his
official capacity as a member of the City
Council of Marion; JERRY MITCHELLE,
individually and in his official capacity as a
member of the City Council of Marion; MICHAEL
BAKER, individually and in his official
capacity as a member of the City Council of
Marion; FRANK M. HART, individually and in his
official capacity as a member of the City
Council of Marion; RALPH ATKINSON,
individually and in his official capacity as a
member of the City Council of Marion; FRAIZER
WALPOH, individually and in his official
capacity as City of Marion Administrator;
CLYDE JAMES, individually; JAMES EQUIPMENT
WRECKER SERVICE; JOHN FINNEY, individually and
in his capacity; RONALD ATKINSON,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(CA-04-1327-4-TLW)
Submitted: June 15, 2006 Decided: June 19, 2006

-- 1 of 3 --

- 2 -
Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Susan Smith, Appellant Pro Se. Douglas Charles Baxter, RICHARDSON,
PLOWDEN, CARPENTER & ROBINSON, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina;
Saunders McKenzie Bridges, Jr., AIKEN, BRIDGES, NUNN, ELLIOTT &
TYLER, PA, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).

-- 2 of 3 --

*In the district court, the lead plaintiff was Derrick Smith;
he is no longer a party on appeal.
- 3 -
PER CURIAM:
Susan Smith * appeals the district court’s order accepting
the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on
her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. On appeal, Smith alleges
that the district court improperly referred the action to the
magistrate judge without the consent of the parties. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. The district
court properly referred Defendants’ motion for summary judgment to
the magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000), and
Smith filed objections to the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
See Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 46 (4th Cir. 1982) (noting
that a district court may refer matters to a magistrate judge
without the consent of the parties under § 636(b)). Accordingly, we
affirm. 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

-- 3 of 3 --