Case Name: Dawn V. MARTIN; Miguel Gallardo, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Johannes BRONDUM; Long and Foster Real Estate, Inc.; Long and Foster Companies; Long and Foster Realtors; Patricia Knight, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; Susan Haughton, Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-08-10
Citations: 667 F. App'x 833
Docket Number: No. 14-1644
Parties: Dawn V. MARTIN; Miguel Gallardo, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Johannes BRONDUM; Long and Foster Real Estate, Inc.; Long and Foster Companies; Long and Foster Realtors; Patricia Knight, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; Susan Haughton, Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 667
Pages: 833–833

Head Matter:
Dawn V. MARTIN; Miguel Gallardo, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Johannes BRONDUM; Long and Foster Real Estate, Inc.; Long and Foster Companies; Long and Foster Realtors; Patricia Knight, a/k/a Patricia Knight Lambert; Susan Haughton, Defendants-Appellees.
No. 14-1644
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: July 29, 2016
Decided: August 10, 2016
Dawn V. Martin, LAW OFFICES OF DAWN V. MARTIN, Washington, D.C„ for Appellants. Susan F. Earman, FRIED-LANDER, FRIEDLANDER & EAR-MAN, PC, McLean, Virginia; Mikhael D. Charnoff, PERRY CHARNOFF PLLC, Arlington, Virginia, for Appellees.
Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dawn V. Martin and Miguel Gallardo appeal the district court's order denying their Fed. R. Civ. Rule 60(b) motion challenging the taxation of costs and denying their request to submit color photographs by electronic means. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Martin v. Brondum, No. 1:11-cv-01118-AJT-TCB (E.D. Va. May 29, 2014). 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