In the first two appeals, Appellants appeal from the district court’s orders imposing sanctions and dismissing their civil action because the subject matter is more properly resolved in the appropriate state court (No. 04-2221), and denying reconsideration of that order and imposing additional sanctions (No. 05-1099). 1 Because the latter order was entered while these cases were before this court on appeal, we previously issued a limited remand for the district court to address the Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b) motion, see Fobian v. Storage Tech. Corp., 164 F.3d 887 (4th Cir. 1999), and for the district court to consider any substitution of parties pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 25(a)(1), in light of the death of Plaintiff Richard Chang. The district court addressed those issues, reinstating the denial of the motion for reconsideration and the increased sanctions amount and denying the motion for substitution.

Consolidated with those two appeals are Appellants’ appeals from the district court’s orders denying the motion for substitution of parties and denying various motions for reconsideration of that order and other orders entered by the district court following our limited remand. We have reviewed the record and the arguments asserted in the parties’ briefs and *184 find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s disposition of the case and its resolution of the various motions, except that the court modifies the orders entered after our limited remand to remove any reference to the ownership of Giant Steel Enterprise Company, Ltd. 2 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 AS MODIFIED.