With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". at 173-74 (explaining the District Court retains subject matter jurisdiction to rule on such motions because they are a continuation of the criminal case); see also id. at 173 n. 11 (emphasizing that appeals of § 2255 dispositions are governed by the civil rules). However, we did not need to decide which part of Fed. R. A pp. P. 4 applied because the Thomas notice of appeal, which was filed ten days after the relevant order was entered, was timely either way. Other cases discussing miscellaneous criminal post-judgment motions like the one here yield no clear direction. Compare United States v. Davis, 532 F.2d 752, 752 (4th Cir.1976) (per curiam) (suggesting that a post-judgment transcript request was a criminal matter), with United States v. Miramontez, 995 F.2d 56, 58 (5th Cir.1993) (<HOLDING>). In any event, we will consider the merits of

A: holding that motions under rule 60b1 may not be used to evade the time limits of rule 4a in a case with a procedural posture similar to washingtons
B: recognizing that as of july 11 1994 contempt proceedings arising from civil actions are no longer governed by rule 333 ala rcrim p and instead are governed by rule 70a
C: holding that the filed rate doctrine barred request for damages but did not preclude request for injunction and civil penalties
D: holding that postjudgment postcollateralrelief request for grandjury transcripts was civil in nature and governed by rule 4a
D.