Whether the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals erred in denying jurisdiction from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma after issuing a stay to allow Petitioner to return to the District Court for a Rule 60(b) Order

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED . i) Piel the Tenth Cleemrt Ceunt of Rippeals cee in chenying yucts diction foomn the US, Pigtriet Court fee the western : District of Skichema (Beex, “A) efter isreing a stay , tn the Ceuct of Agpeals te altew Fetitiener €e peturn | te the Dicteek Court fir a Rute Suck) Orden et . Eiealish, the Dirtriet Court Benled the Rule cH s matren, ane actead issued ORDER and Te pament aun alaists Remele ee open (App ». Me exhib ites Ba amok “ad ? 2) Died tee Distrre® Court ece in DENYING Petittoner's mete , . fer Rule S4(h) Grider ef Final €y, tamck spctencl iseuing ee, New ORDER ane Sad gm ene C App se, “ee feh beet OR” eed "ery? 3) Was « Rule 54¢5* appre peret resalutien of Finaley gonsiel ering the Text Circe b's rellance en Hetmana ¥, Sreed, (EB F.3d 767 Fey (ret sie 1998) ia ibs [8-Fed-714 ORDER valging guertions , E4R soente, eabewt jucisdiceiin, when Haunanin resolution ut: & jurisdictional guestien war Rule 540A), (gow, “B'S 2? f . a :