Case Name: Tiemoko COULIBALY, Dr.; Fatou Gaye-Coulibaly, Dr., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant-Appellee, and Fannie Mae; NRT-Mid-Atlantic Title Service, LLC; Long & Foster Real Estate, Incorporated; First American Title Insurance Company; FAACS; Guardian Funding; Integrated Asset Services; Simcox and Barclay, LLP; John and Jane Doe, Defendants
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-10-20
Citations: 584 F. App'x 178
Docket Number: No. 14-1594
Parties: Tiemoko COULIBALY, Dr.; Fatou Gaye-Coulibaly, Dr., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant-Appellee, and Fannie Mae; NRT-Mid-Atlantic Title Service, LLC; Long & Foster Real Estate, Incorporated; First American Title Insurance Company; FAACS; Guardian Funding; Integrated Asset Services; Simcox and Barclay, LLP; John and Jane Doe, Defendants.
Judges: Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 584
Pages: 178–178

Head Matter:
Tiemoko COULIBALY, Dr.; Fatou Gaye-Coulibaly, Dr., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant-Appellee, and Fannie Mae; NRT-Mid-Atlantic Title Service, LLC; Long & Foster Real Estate, Incorporated; First American Title Insurance Company; FAACS; Guardian Funding; Integrated Asset Services; Simcox and Barclay, LLP; John and Jane Doe, Defendants.
No. 14-1594.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 16, 2014.
Decided: Oct. 20, 2014.
Tiemoko Coulibaly, Fatou Gaye-Couli-baly, Appellants Pro Se. Chad King, John Sears Simcox, Simcox & Barclay, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tiemoko Coulibaly and Fatou Gaye-Coulibaly appeal from the district court's orders denying their motions filed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Coulibaly v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., No. 8:10-cv-03517-DKC, 2014 WL 992778 (D.Md. Mar. 13 & June 16, 2014). We deny the cross-motions to strike and 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.