With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". punishment; (4) he has been “excessively fined for charges [he] plead not guilty to[ ]”; (5) doctors have “deliberately misdiagnosed” him; (6) he has been “sexually abused”; and (7) he “was a sexual abuse victim ... at the prison in April of 2010.” Id. at 1-2. As a threshold matter, the district court did not specify whether its dismissal was with or without prejudice. We presume the dismissal was with prejudice since a dismissal for failure to state a claim and a dismissal for failure to prosecute are decisions on the merits. Osborn v. Shillinger, 861 F.2d 612, 617 (10th Cir.1988); Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). As such, the district court should have considered the Ehrenhaus factors with respect to its Rule 41(b) dismissal. See Procter & Gamble Co. v. Haugen, 427 F.3d 727, 738 (10th Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). The district court in this case, however,

A: holding that an order dismissing a complaint without prejudice is a final appealable order only if no amendment to the complaint could cure the defects in the  case internal quotation marks omitted
B: recognizing that we review a trial courts jury instruc tions for abuse of discretion and that a district court abuses its discretion when it makes an error of law internal quotation marks omitted
C: recognizing district courts broad discretion to impose prison term up to the statutory maximum for violations of supervised release internal quotation marks omitted
D: holding district courts dismissal of an action with prejudice without addressing ehrenhaus factors on the record amounts to an abuse of discretion internal quotation marks omitted
D.