OPINION

Robert Barefoot and Deonna Enterprises, Inc. appeal the district court’s grant of partial summary judgment to Wellness Publishing, Holt M.D. Consulting, Inc., Nature’s Benefit, Inc., and Stephen Holt. For the reasons set forth below, we will affirm.

Because we write primarily for the parties, we need not repeat the facts or procedural history of this case. Moreover, the district court has ably summarized the relevant background. See Barefoot v. Wellness Publ’g, 2009 WL 4143110 (D.N.J. Nov.17, 2009). On appeal, Appellants argue that the district court erred when it granted summary judgment to Stephen Holt and dismissed all claims against him.

In his detailed and thoughtful opinion, Judge Pisano carefully and clearly explained his reasons for dismissing Holt from the lawsuit. See id. He reiterated these reasons in his opinion and order denying Appellants’ motion for reconsideration. See Barefoot v. Wellness Publ’g, 2010 WL 893571 (D.N.J. Mar.8, 2010). We can add little to Judge Pisano’s analysis and discussion and we will therefore affirm *66 the district court’s order for substantially the same reasons as set forth in that opinion.