Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-09-01574/USCOURTS-ca10-09-01574-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 355
Nature of Suit: Motor Vehicle Product Liability
Cause of Action: 

---

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

March 22, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ERICA HOFFMAN; GARY

HOFFMAN; SANDRA HOFFMAN,

Individually,

 Plaintiffs - Appellees,

v. 

FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a

Delaware corporation,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-1574 

(D.C. No. 1:07-CV-00081-REB-CBS) 

ORDER

Before TACHA, O’BRIEN and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

This appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. At the time the notice of

appeal was filed, the district court had not entered a final appealable order.

“Under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we have jurisdiction to reach the merits of an appeal

from the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion, so long as the underlying ruling or

judgment was a final decision of the district court.” Servants of the Paraclete v.

Doe, 204 F.3d 1005, 1008 (10th Cir. 2000) (internal quotation omitted) (emphasis

added). 

Moreover, the fact that the district court has since entered judgment does

Appellate Case: 09-1574 Document: 01018388645 Date Filed: 03/22/2010 Page: 1 
-2-

not render the notice of appeal valid, as argued by the plaintiffs. See Nolan v.

U.S. Dept. of Justice, 973 F.2d 843, 846 (10th Cir. 1992) (“Merely submitting a

final district court order for the purpose of perfecting a premature appeal does not

automatically effectuate the appeal of every judgment or order rendered in the

entire case.”). 

APPEAL DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Ellen Rich Reiter

Deputy Clerk/Jurisdictional Attorney

Appellate Case: 09-1574 Document: 01018388645 Date Filed: 03/22/2010 Page: 2