UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _______________________ No. 01-20781 _______________________ IN THE MATTER OF: JORGE A. LENTINO, MD; EDUARDO P. LENTINO, MD, Debtors, SUSANA RAQUEL SHAFER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ASSIGNEE OF THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL ESTATE OF GEORGE SALVADOR LENTINO; FABIOLA VANESA LENTINO; MICHELLE MARIE LENTINO; NATALIE LENTINO; CYNTHIA VICTORIA LENTINO; INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ASSIGNEE OF THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL ESTATE OF GEORGE SALVADOR LENTINO; MARTA A. LENTINO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE EDUARDO P. LENTINO CHILDREN’S TRUST; THE EDUARDO P. LENTINO CHILDREN’S TRUST, AND MARIA RAQUEL LENTINO, Appellants, versus LOWELL CAGE, TRUSTEE, Appellee. _________________________________________________________________ IN THE MATTER OF: EDUARDO P. LENTINO, M.D., ALSO KNOWN AS EDUARDO PEDRO LENTINO, ALSO KNOWN AS E. P. LENTINO; JORGE LENTINO, M.D., DEBTORS; LOWELL T. CAGE, TRUSTEE, Appellee, versus SUSANA RAQUEL SHAFER, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ASSIGNEE OF THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL ESTATE OF GEORGE SALVADOR LENTINO; FABIOLA VANESA LENTINO; MICHELLE MARIE LENTINO; NATALIE LENTINO; CYNTHIA VICTORIA LENTINO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ASSIGNEE OF THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST OF THE INDIVIDUAL ESTATE OF GEORGE SALVADOR LENTINO; MARTA LENTINO, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS TRUSTEE OF THE EDUARDO P. LENTINO CHILDREN’S TRUST; THE EDUARDO P. LENTINO CHILDREN’S TRUST, AND MARIA RAQUEL LENTINO, Appellants. _________________________________________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas Civil Docket #H-97-CV-498 _________________________________________________________________ November 13, 2002 Before JONES, SMITH, and SILER,* Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:** The court has carefully considered this appeal in light of the briefs, oral argument, and the tortured and litigious history of the underlying bankruptcy cases. Having done so, we find no reversible error of fact or law. The district court’s “amended” judgment merely restated the disposition of the debtors’ property interests from the beginning of the bankruptcies and the legal consequences flowing from that disposition in light of the court’s title and preclusion orders. Moreover, appellants were well aware in advance of the scope and purpose of the court’s hearing that preceded entry of the “amended” judgement. * Circuit Judge of the 6th Circuit, 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  Ms. Lentino and the other appellants and their confederates are placed on notice that any further efforts to interfere with the finality of the federal court’s orders in these related cases will not be tolerated. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.