Cantwell v. United States

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-1589 DENNIS R. CANTWELL; KAREN F. CANTWELL; OPTO- METRIC SERVICES TRUST; C.F. FAMILY TRUST, Petitioners - Appellants, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of Virginia, at Alexandria. T.S. Ellis, III, District Judge. (CA-98-80-MC) Submitted: August 19, 1999 Decided: August 30, 1999 Before WIDENER and KING, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Cir- cuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Dennis R. Cantwell, Karen F. Cantwell, Appellants Pro Se. Frank Phillip Cihlar, Joel L. McElvain, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C.; Robert K. Coulter, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM: Dennis and Karen Cantwell appeal the district court’s order denying their petition to quash sixteen Internal Revenue Service summonses. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Cantwell v. United States, No. CA-98-80-MC (E.D. Va. Mar. 10, 1999).* 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 * Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on March 5, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on March 10, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2