relief no later than ten days after the judgment is entered. Id. § 4(a)(4)(A)(vi); Searles v. Dechant, 393 F.3d 1126, 1129 (10th Cir. 2004). In this case, Ms. Williams’s September 8 motion did not toll the time limit for filing a notice of appeal as to the court’s August 8 judgment because it was not filed within ten days. Accordingly, her time limit for filing a notice of appeal as to the August 8 judgment expired on October 10. Since she did not file her notice of appeal until December 8 it was untimely, and we therefore lack jurisdic tion to review the August 8 judgment and underlying Contempt Order. See id. at 1130 (noting that untimely notice of appeal is insufficient to confer jurisdiction on this court); Van Skiver v. United States, 952 F.2d 1241, 1243 (10th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>). The notice of appeal was timely, however,
holding that an appeal from a denial of a rule 59e motion should have been construed as seeking review of the underlying judgment holding that a coa is required to appeal the denial of a rule 60b motion from a judgment in a  2254 proceeding holding that the standard of review is abuse of discretion and an appeal from denial of rule 60b relief does not bring up the underlying judgment for review holding that appeal from denial of rule 60b motion raised for review only the district courts order of denial and not the underlying judgment itself holding that the appellate court should have construed the notice of appeal from the denial of a motion to vacate the judgment as an attempt to appeal from the underlying judgment