of appeal filed during the pendency of a Rule 59 motion is a nullity, as if no notice of appeal were filed at all. However, Rule 4(a)(4) was amended effective December 1, 1993, to pro vide that when a notice is prematurely filed, it “shall be in abeyance, and shall become effective upon the date of entry of an order that disposes of the last of all such motions.” Under the old version of Rule 4(a)(4), applicable at the time Wallis filed the notice of appeal, the notice was a nullity. Thus, the issue becomes whether the notice may be resurrected by a retroactive application of the amended version of Rule 4(a)(4). See Leader Nat’l Ins. Co. v. Industrial Indemnity Ins. Co., 19 F.3d 444, 445 (9th Cir.1994) (applying amended Rule retroactively); Burt v. Ware, 14 F.3d 256, 258 (5th Cir.1994) (<HOLDING>). The Supreme Court’s order adopting the 1993
holding that rule announced in mcconnell applies retroactively recognizing that 1996 amendment to definition of aggravated felony applies retroactively holding that statute would be applied retroactively when to do so would better effect the remedial intentions of the legislature in enacting it holding that the rule announced by booker  does not operate retroactively holding amended rule applies retroactively unless it would work injustice