the December 23, 1997 Order also fails to aid the Service’s appeal efforts because that motion too, was not filed within ten days of the December 23, 1997 Order. Ordinarily, under Bankruptcy Rule 8002(b), a motion to alter or amend a judgment (as well as a motion for new trial or any similar motion specified in Rule 8002(b)(1) through (4)) suspends the time for appeal by all parties until disposition of the last of those post-judgment motions. Indeed, Bankruptcy Rule 8002(b)(4) states that a notice of appeal filed before disposition of a pending post-judgment motion is ineffective to appeal the challenged judgment until entry of an order disposing of the last of such motions. See also Design Classics, Inc. v. Westphal (In re Design Classics, Inc.), 788 F.2d 1384, 1385 (8th Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). To suspend the time for appeal through a Rule
holding that notice of appeal did not divest the district court of jurisdiction at the time it was filed because a motion for reconsideration was pending holding that a motion for reconsideration in a criminal case must be filed within the 14day period for filing a notice of appeal holding that notice of appeal was not effectively taken where appeal was filed simultaneously with timely motion for reconsideration because when timely motion for reconsideration is filed a notice of appeal filed prior to disposition of the motion to reconsider has no effect holding that a timely motion for reconsideration tolls the statute of limitations even if the motion is procedurally invalid holding that a notice of appeal is timely when filed before final judgment is entered by the district court