had an additional 150 days to file an appeal. See id. In fact, our Court has extended the protections of the separate document rule even to a litigant who admitted that he understood that an order not in separate form was a final judgment. See Gregson & Assoc, v. Gov’t of the Virgin Islands, 675 F.2d 589, 592 (3d Cir.1982). The cases cited by my colleagues and the Commonwealth do not disturb these holdings merely because they state that the separate document rule is not jurisdictional. See, e.g., Henglein v. Colt Indus. Operating Corp., 260 F.3d 201, 209 n. 5 (3d Cir.2001) (noting that parties may opt not to raise non-compliance with the separate document rule because its violation is not jurisdictional); Bankers Trust Co. v. Mallis, 435 U.S. 381, 382-84, 98 S.Ct. 1117, 55 L.Ed.2d 357 (<HOLDING>). Notwithstanding that I would hear the appeal
holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence holding that a judgment set forth in a separate document is not a prerequisite to appellate jurisdiction where the parties assumed that there was a final judgment holding the separate document rule violated when the alleged judgment was included with the memorandum and order of the court holding that lack of a separate judgment does not preclude the taking of an appeal from a district courts final decision because the parties may waive the separate judgment requirement where one has accidentally not been entered holding that because the claims were dismissed with prejudice there was a final judgment for purposes of appellate review