
    Sal CELAURO, Paul Astrup, Rosanne B. Astrup, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES, Internal Revenue Service, Lawrence Engle, Smith’s Aerospace, Inc., Teacher’s Federal Credit Union, DCS Transport & Logistics Solutions, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 06-0984-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    Jan. 24, 2007.
    Sal Celauro, Jr., pro se, Massapequa Park, NY.
    Paul S. Astrup, pro se, East Quogue, NY.
    Rosanne B. Astrup, pro se, East Quogue, NY.
    John Schuman, Attorney, Tax Division, Department of Justice (Eileen J. O’Con-nor, Assistant Attorney General; Richard Farber, Attorney, Tax Division, Department of Justice, on the brief; Roslynn R. Mauskopf, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, of counsel), Washington, D.C., for Defendant-Appellee United States.
    Jonathan D. Forstot, Thacher Proffitt & Wood LLP (Samaa A.F. Haridi, on the brief), New York, NY, for Defendant-Appellee Smiths Aerospace LLC.
    Nicholas Vincent Campasano, Deer Park, NY, for Defendant-Appellee Teachers Federal Credit Union.
    John T. Bauer, Littler Mendelson, P.C., Melville, NY, for Defendant-Appellee DCS Transport & Logistics Solutions.
    Present: PIERRE N. LEVAL, CHESTER J. STRAUB, Circuit Judges, and STEFAN R. UNDERHILL, District Judge.
    
      
      The Hon. Stefan R. Underhill, United States District Judge for the District of Connecticut, sitting by designation.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiffs-Appellants Sal Celauro, Jr., Paul Astrup, and Rosanne B. Astrup appeal a January 28, 2006 decision and order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Arthur D. Spatt, Judge), reduced to a judgment on January 30, dismissing their complaint with prejudice. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts, procedural history, and specification of issues on appeal.

For substantially the reasons set forth in the District Court’s January 28 decision, we affirm the judgment. We have considered all of plaintiffs-appellants’ arguments and find them without merit.

The District Court’s judgment dated January 30, 2006 is AFFIRMED.  