signals that she understands that a final judgment has been filed despite the order’s failure to comply with the separate-document rule, she must file an appeal within 30 days of the faulty judgment or lose her ability to appeal altogether. This is a dubious argument. See United States v. Indrelunas, 411 U.S. 216, 221-22, 93 S.Ct. 1562, 36 L.Ed.2d 202 (1973) (per curiam) (although the Government had clearly signaled its understanding that a stipulation for damages was the final judgment, the separate-document provision must be “mechanically applied in order to avoid new uncertainties as to the date on which a judgment is entered” and therefore the Government’s appeal was timely); Gregson & Assocs. Architects v. Gov’t of the Virgin Islands, 675 F.2d 589 (3d Cir.1982) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>); Fed. RApp. P. 4(a) advisory committee notes
holding that appellant had standing to appeal because it was bound by the judgment even though it did not meet the second requirement holding that a notice of appeal is timely when filed before final judgment is entered by the district court holding that court had jurisdiction where no separate judgment had been entered even though notice of appeal was not timely filed as measured from the final decision holding appeal was timely although the appellant admitted it had understood a faulty judgment to be final holding that a judgment is final only when the parties have exhausted their respective rights to appeal or if no party to the action filed a timely appeal