2, 2006, which also fixed the amount of sanctions against Appellant at $20,000 in attorneys fees and costs. Pursuant to Fed. Bankr.R. 8002(a), a notice of appeal filed after the announcement of an order, but before entry on the docket of the written order is treated as having been filed after the entry of the written order. See e.g., Gillette Foods Inc. v. Bayernwald-Fruchteverwertung, GmbH, 977 F.2d 809, 812 (3d Cir.1992) (construing a similar provision of Fed. R.App. Proc. 4(a)(2) and holding that notice of appeal filed between the district court’s announcement of its judgment on the sanctions motion and its entry of judgment for the sums awarded was deemed to be timely filed after the judgment was actually entered); In re Al Lapin, Ir., 226 B.R. 637, 640-641 (9th Cir. BAP 1998) (<HOLDING>). Thus, Appellant’s Appeal is timely and not
holding that where the issue of sanctions was not before the court of appeals when the appeal was filed the district court retained jurisdiction holding that where party had reasonable grounds to believe conduct was in compliance with the district courts order imposition of sanctions was not warranted and constituted an abuse of discretion holding that under fed r bankrproc 8002a an appeal of a bankrupt court order finding that sanctions are warranted was not premature where the order fixing the amount of sanctions and ordering payment was subsequently entered more than thirty days later holding sanctions order was too general to support award holding sanctions order not final where the amount of sanctions had not yet been determined