Frankie Rocchetti v. Lowe’s Home Centers, Inc.; the Gorilla Glue Company

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-1886
FRANKIE ROCCHETTI,
Plaintiff - Appellant,
v.
LOWE’S HOME CENTERS, INC.; THE GORILLA GLUE COMPANY,
Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior
District Judge. (1:12-cv-07447)
Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: November 20, 2014
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.1
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Frankie Rocchetti, Appellant Pro Se. Edgar Allen Poe, Jr.,
PULLIN, FOWLER, FLANAGAN, BROWN & POE, PLLC, Charleston, West
Virginia, for Appellees.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
1 The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 46(d) (2006).

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Frankie Rocchetti appeals the district court’s order
accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge, granting
summary judgment in favor of Appellees, and dismissing his
complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues
raised in the Appellant’s brief.2 See 4th Cir. R. 34(b).
Because Rocchetti’s informal brief is conclusory and does not
challenge the basis for the district court’s denial of his
strict products liability claim for lack of causation, Rocchetti
has forfeited appellate review of that portion of the court’s
order.
With regard to the failure to warn claim, the
magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised
Rocchetti that failure to file timely objections to this
recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court
order based upon the recommendation. Rocchetti has waived
appellate review of the failure to warn claim by failing to file
objections after receiving proper notice. See Wright v.
Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
2 To the extent that Rocchetti challenges the district
court’s rejection of his demand for prosecution of others, we
conclude that the court properly denied relief. See Linda
R.S. v. Richard D., 410 U.S. 614, 619 (1973).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
We grant Rocchetti leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis,
and we dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --