14, 1996 order denying attorney fees and awarding sanctions. Nu-Cape is not challenging the hours spent by Wendy’s council nor the hourly fee. Resolution of this dispute turns upon whether the order entered on March 14, 1996, awarding sanctions in the form of costs and attorney fees to the plaintiff, was a final and enforceable judgment, or whether the order became a judgment within the ambit of Rule 59(e) upon the resolution of the fee issue. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(a) defines a “judgment” as “a decree and any order from which an appeal lies.” Entry of a judgment is final for purposes of appeal even if it leaves the amount of attorney fees to be awarded unresolved. U.S. for Use and Benefit of Familian Northwest, Inc. v. RG & B Contractors, Inc., 21 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 1994) (<HOLDING>); Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 486 U.S.
holding that a decision on the merits is a final decision for purposes of filing an appeal pursuant to 28 usc  1291 whether or not there remains for adjudication a request for attorneys fees attributable to the case holding that a decision on the merits was a final decision when the recoverability or amount of attorney fees for the litigation remained to be determined regardless of whether such fees were sought under statute case law or contract holding that the party seeking contractual attorneys fees is entitled to a decision on the merits holding that court of appeals erred by rendering judgment for full amount of attorneys fees sought after reversing 0 fee award because jury awarded less in damages than amount sought and therefore uncontroverted attorney testimony on amount of attorneys fees did not establish amount of reasonable and necessary fees as a matter of law holding a summary judgment to be final although motion to assess attorney fees remained pending because award of attorney fees is collateral to judgment