In Craig v. Craig, 227 Ariz. 105, 106, 107,8-9, 13, 253 P.3d 624, 625, 626 (2011), the parties filed a notice of appeal and notice of cross-appeal while a motion for new trial was pending. 227 Ariz. 105,2, 253 P.3d at 624. After the superior court denied the motion for new trial, neither party filed an amended or new notice of appeal. Id. In affirming this court's decision to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, our supreme court explained that the Barassi exception is limited to situations in which a notice of appeal is filed "'after the trial court has made its final decision, but before it has entered a formal judgment, if no decision of the court could change and the only remaining task is merely ministerial.'" Id. at 107,13, 253 P.3d at 626. See also: Stevens v. Mehagian's Home Furnishings, Inc., 90 Ariz. 42, 44-45, 365 P.2d 208, 209-10 (1961) (stating that when there is at least one outstanding claim and the superior court has not included Rule 54(b) language, the judgment is subject to modification and not final); Pulaski v. Perkins, 127 Ariz. 216, 217, 619 P.2d 488, 489 (App. 1980) (citing Stevens and noting that the absence of Rule 54(b) language "defeats finality" whenever there are outstanding claims remaining); Rule 78(B) "In all other cases, a notice of appeal filed in the absence of a final judgment, or while any party's time-extending motion is pending before the trial court, is 'ineffective' and a nullity." Craig, 227 Ariz. at 107,13, 253 P.3d at 626.