
    John R. BEHRMANN, as individual and assignee of all individuals listed on Second Amended Complaint filed on 1/22/2016 (Doc No. 133); Nancy P. Behrmann, as individual and assignee of all individuals listed on Second Amended Complaint filed on 1/22/2016 (Doc No. 133), Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Michael GOLDSTEIN, an individual; Christie Kennett, an individual; John T. Houk, II, an individual; Miriam M. Houk, an individual; John T. Houk, III, an individual; Janet H. Ridgely, an individual; Julie L. Houk, an individual; Does, 1-10 inclusive; Robert Ben Kori & Associates, corporate form unknown; Congressional District Program Inc., a corporation; Charity Admin, Inc., a corporation; Stellar Advisors, Inc., a corporation; Stellar Financial Inc., a corporation; Stellar Technology Solutions, LLC, a limited liability company; Stellar McKim, LLC, a limited liability company; McKim Capital, a corporation; Dana C. Fenton, an individual; Todd Thibodeaux, an individual; Johnathan M. Gill; Julia Weltmann, an individual; Robert H. Taggart, Jr., an individual; Husch Blackwell LLP, a Missouri Limited Liability Partnership, Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 17-1102
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: September 29, 2017
    Decided: October 4, 2017
    Glenn W. Merrick, G. W. MERRICK & ASSOCIATES, LLC, Centennial, Colorado; Nathan D. Rozsa, SUROVELL ISAACS PETERSEN & LEVY, PLC, Fairfax, Virginia; Daniel J. Schendzielos, COLORADO TRIAL LAWYERS & LEGAL SERVICES, LLC, Greenwood Village, Colorado, for Appellants. Erika L. Morabito, Brittany J. Nelson, FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP, Washington, D.C.; David B. Goroff, FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP, Chicago, Illinois, for Appellees.
    Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
   Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

John R. Behrmann and Nancy Behrm-ann, individually and as assignees of 38 individuals listed in their second amended complaint, appeal from the district court’s order granting the Defendants’ motions to dismiss and dismissing their complaint. We have reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, and we find no reversible error. To the extent that any of their claims are not barred by collateral estoppel, they were filed beyond the applicable statute of limitations. Accordingly, we affirm. See Scott v. United States, 328 F.3d 132, 137 (4th Cir. 2003) (providing that appeals court may “affirm on any ground appearing in the record, including theories not relied upon or rejected by the district court”). We grant the motion to submit this appeal on the briefs 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  