Cheryl E. ROSE, Trustee, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Albert M. BARGESKI, Defendant-Appellee, and Audrey Yvonne Bargeski, Debtor-Appellee

Cheryl E. ROSE, Trustee, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. Albert M. BARGESKI, Defendant—Appellee, and Audrey Yvonne Bargeski, Debtor—Appellee. No. 06-1480. United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit. Submitted: June 27, 2007. Decided: July 30, 2007. James M. Hoffman, John D. Sadler, Shulman, Rogers, Gandal, Pordy & Ecker, P.A., Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Laura J. Margulies, Laura Margulies & Associates, Rockville, Maryland, for Appel-lees. Before NIEMEYER, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. [MAJORITY — PER CURIAM:] Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Cheryl E. Rose, the trustee in the underlying bankruptcy proceeding, appeals from the district court’s order affirming the bankruptcy court’s order finding that a conveyance of certain real property was an avoidable post-petition transfer under 11 U.S.C. § 549 (2000), but reducing the amount of the bankruptcy court’s iudgment in her favor from $68,929.18 to $22,080.05. We have reviewed the record, including the opinions of the courts below, as well as the Trustee’s brief and we find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s decision for the reasons stated in its opinion affirming as modified the bankruptcy court’s order. Rose v. Bargeski (In re Bargeski); Case Nos. 8:05-cv-00962-RWT; 8:05-cv-01410-RWT; BK-04-01432, 2006 WL 1238742 (D.Md. Mar. 31, 2006). 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.