Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): explained that' [t]he distractions of the litigation pose a serious threat to the continued successful operations of [SGL Carbon]. Further, the potential liability faced by [SGL Carbon] could very well force it out of business. Consistent with the policies and purposes of Chapter 11 which encourage early filing so as to increase the possibility of successful reorganization, the Court will not allow [SGL Carbon] to wait idly by for impending financial and operational ruin, when [SGL Carbon] can take action now to avoid such a consequence. SGL Carbon Corp., 233 B.R. at 291. The Committee has appealed. II. The District Court had jurisdiction over this bankruptcy case under 28 U.S.C. § 1334(a). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. See In re Brown, 916 F.2d 120, 124 (3d Cir.1990) (<HOLDING>). We have not yet had occasion to decide what 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the rule 21 severance rendered the district court verdict a final and appealable judgment under 28 usc  1291 (B) holding that order denying motion to dismiss a bankruptcy petition is final under 28 usc  1291 (C) holding that summary judgment order that does not dispose of all claims between parties does not confer appellate jurisdiction because it is not a final decision under 28 usc  1291 (D) holding that pursuant to the collateral order doctrine and 28 usc  1291 a state may appeal from a district court order denying it eleventh amendment immunity (E) holding that a nonparty may appeal an order of criminal contempt arising out of a pending action under 28 usc  1291
Output (English): holding that pursuant to the collateral order doctrine and 28 usc  1291 a state may appeal from a district court order denying it eleventh amendment immunity