Opinion
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00370-CMA-MJW
11-27-2012
Judge Christine M. Arguello
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO CLARIFY
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification of Final Judgment. (Doc. # 141.) Essentially, Plaintiff seeks assurance from this Court that the Final Judgment (Doc. # 118) entered in this case "is, in fact, a final judgment subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit." (Doc. # 141 at 4.) Plaintiff's concern stems from the absence of an explicit mention of its First Supplemental Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief (Doc. # 88) in: this Court's September 21, 2012 oral ruling (see Doc. # 125 at 30); the minute entry that followed the Court's ruling (Doc. # 117); or the Final Judgment entered on September 25, 2012 (Doc. # 118). As Plaintiff notes, however, all three docket entries state that the case was dismissed in its entirety. Moreover, and to quell Plaintiff's lingering concern, the Court notes that its ruling - and, thus, the subsequent docket entries - encompass Plaintiff's First Supplemental Complaint, which the Court considered, along with all of the other filings in this case, before issuing its ruling.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Clarification of Final Judgment (Doc. # 141) is GRANTED, and the Final Judgment is hereby CLARIFIED so that the parties, and the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, are aware that this case truly has been DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.
BY THE COURT:
_________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge