1271, 1272 (10th Cir.2001) (noting this court has an independent duty to examine our own appellate jurisdiction). [I]n determining whether an order of dismissal [without prejudice] is appeal-able, we must examine whether the district court dismissed the complaint or the action. A dismissal of the complaint is ordinarily a non-final nonappealable order (since amendment would generally be available), while a dismissal of the entire action is ordinarily final. Mobley v. McCormick, 40 F.3d 337, 339 (10th Cir.1994) (citations omitted). In making this determination, this court focuses on the district court’s intent in issuing its dismissal order. See id. Here, we deem the district court to have intended to dismiss the entire action. See Ciralsky v. C.I.A., 355 F.3d 661, 665-68 (D.C.Cir.2004) (<HOLDING>); see also Leonard v. Standell, 145 Fed.Appx.
holding that dismissal with leave to amend is not a final order holding dismissal for failure to comply with rule 8 was dismissal of entire action which was appealable final order holding that plaintiffs were entitled to vacate final order of dismissal as void when they did not receive the motion for dismissal or notice of the hearing on the order until after the dismissal was entered holding that dismissal for failure to comply with discovery orders is on the merits holding that a plaintiffs voluntary dismissal of his claims with prejudice constituted a final order that was appealable