UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-1957

ARTHUR M. FIELD, PhD.; KATHRYN TAILLON; T. BART KELLEY,

Plaintiffs – Appellants,

and

CAPITAL INVESTMENT FUNDING LLC, Jerry T. Saad, Receiver for Capital Investment Funding LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

HENRY D. MCMASTER, Individually and as Securities Commissioner of South Carolina; WILLIAM JOSEPH CONDON, JR., Individually and as Assistant Securities Commissioner; TOMMY WINDSOR, Individually and as Securities Investigator; JOE F. JORDAN, JR., Individually and as an Investigator of the Attorney General; JENNIFER EVANS, as personal representative; LANSING LOGAN, Individually and as a Special Investigator of the Attorney General; OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, State of South Carolina,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:09-cv-01949-HMH)

Submitted: October 14, 2010 Decided: October 20, 2010

Before MOTZ, KING, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arthur M. Field, Kathryn Taillon, T. Bart Kelley, Appellants Pro Se. William Henry Davidson, II, Kenneth Paul Woodington, DAVIDSON, MORRISON & LINDEMANN, PA, Columbia, South Carolina; Evan Markus Gessner, Michael Stephen Pauley, LIDE & PAULEY, LLC, Lexington, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

2 PER CURIAM:

Arthur M. Field, Kathryn Taillon, and T. Bart Kelley

appeal the district court’s order adopting in part the

magistrate judge’s recommendation and granting summary judgment

in favor of several state employees in this

(2006) action. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we deny the Appellants’ motion

to file a state transcript as an attachment to their informal

brief and affirm for the reasons stated by the district court.

Field v. McMaster, No. 6:09-cv-01949-HMH (D.S.C. Aug. 17, 2010).

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

3