With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". (“Baptichon”) appeals from an order of the district court (Garaufis, J.) granting Defendant-Appellee Nevada State Bank’s motion to dismiss and denying Baptichon’s motion to amend his complaint. We assume that the parties are familiar with the facts, the procedural history, and the scope of the issues presented on appeal. Because the decision of the district court was based on the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge (Mann, M.J.), and because Baptichon did not file any timely objections to the report and recommendation, notwithstanding due notice by the magistrate judge that “[fjailure to file objections in a timely manner may waive a right to appeal the District Court order,” Baptichon has waived his right to appeal. See DeLeon v. Strode, 284 F.3d 84, 86 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Male Juvenile (95-CR-1074-),

A: holding that failure to object to magistrate judges recommendation waived issue on appeal
B: holding failure to object in timely fashion at trial results in waiver of issue for appeal
C: holding that failure to object in a timely fashion to a magistrate judges report and recommendation generally constitutes a waiver of the defaulting partys right to appeal provided that the parties received clear notice of the consequences of their failure to object
D: holding that the failure to object to an instruction constitutes a waiver of error
C.