Case Name: Robert WARREN; Jacquelin Warren, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SMITH DEBNAM NARRON DRAKE SAINTSING & MYERS, LLP; Adam M. Gottsegen, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2012-02-17
Citations: 466 F. App'x 284
Docket Number: No. 11-1525
Parties: Robert WARREN; Jacquelin Warren, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SMITH DEBNAM NARRON DRAKE SAINTSING & MYERS, LLP; Adam M. Gottsegen, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 466
Pages: 284–284

Head Matter:
Robert WARREN; Jacquelin Warren, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SMITH DEBNAM NARRON DRAKE SAINTSING & MYERS, LLP; Adam M. Gottsegen, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 11-1525.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Jan. 26, 2012.
Decided: Feb. 17, 2012.
Craig M. Shapiro, Keogh Law, Ltd., Chicago, Illinois; Richard J. Rubin, Santa Fe, New Mexico, for Appellants. John D. Burns, Camden R. Webb, Erica T. Meyers, Williams Mullen, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Robert Warren and Jacquelin Warren appeal the district court's order dismissing their complaint under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Warren v. Smith Debnam Narron Drake Saintsing & Myers, LLP, No. 7:10-cv-00071-BO (E.D.N.C. Apr. 19, 2011). 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.