IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________

m 00-41264 _______________

JAMES PALMER NEILL, III, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

JAMES PALMER NEILL, III; JODY AYKE; MARC ANDREW BIRENBAUM; WILLIAM BUTLER; CHERYL BUTLER; et al.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

VERSUS

FORD MOTOR COMPANY; DAVID J. BICKERSTAFF; DAVID J. BICKERSTAFF AND ASSOCIATES, INCORPORATED,

Defendants-Appellees.

_________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas m 5:99-CV-106 _________________________ November 13, 2001 Before SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges, and CUMMINGS,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM:**

Plaintiffs bring an action they describe as fraud in the

inducement of various settlement agreements regarding litigation in

state courts. They appeal the district court’s dismissal, which

was based on considerations of comity and the Anti-Injunction Act.

We have reviewed the briefs and applicable portions of the record

and have heard the arguments of counsel. We conclude that the dis-

trict court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing.

Accordingly, we affirm, without prejudice to the plaintiffs’ right

to file bills of review in the respective state courts. See

Dubroff v. Dubroff,

(5th Cir. 1987).

AFFIRMED.

* District Judge of the Northern District of Texas, sitting by designation.

** Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

2