{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman;}{\f1\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 020b0604020202020204}Arial;} {\f2\fmodern\fcharset0\fprq1{\*\panose 02070309020205020404}Courier New;}{\f37\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE;}{\f38\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr;}{\f40\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek;} {\f41\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur;}{\f42\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew);}{\f43\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic);}{\f44\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic;} {\f45\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese);}{\f47\fswiss\fcharset238\fprq2 Arial CE;}{\f48\fswiss\fcharset204\fprq2 Arial Cyr;}{\f50\fswiss\fcharset161\fprq2 Arial Greek;}{\f51\fswiss\fcharset162\fprq2 Arial Tur;} {\f52\fswiss\fcharset177\fprq2 Arial (Hebrew);}{\f53\fswiss\fcharset178\fprq2 Arial (Arabic);}{\f54\fswiss\fcharset186\fprq2 Arial Baltic;}{\f55\fswiss\fcharset163\fprq2 Arial (Vietnamese);}{\f57\fmodern\fcharset238\fprq1 Courier New CE;} {\f58\fmodern\fcharset204\fprq1 Courier New Cyr;}{\f60\fmodern\fcharset161\fprq1 Courier New Greek;}{\f61\fmodern\fcharset162\fprq1 Courier New Tur;}{\f62\fmodern\fcharset177\fprq1 Courier New (Hebrew);} {\f63\fmodern\fcharset178\fprq1 Courier New (Arabic);}{\f64\fmodern\fcharset186\fprq1 Courier New Baltic;}{\f65\fmodern\fcharset163\fprq1 Courier New (Vietnamese);}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255; \red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0; \red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;\red255\green255\blue255;}{\stylesheet{\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\s15\qj \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext15 Level 1;}{\s16\qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext16 Level 2;}{ \s17\qj \li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext17 Level 3;}{\s18\qj \li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext18 Level 4;}{\s19\qj \li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext19 Level 5;}{\s20\qj \li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext20 Level 6;}{\s21\qj \li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext21 Level 7;}{ \s22\qj \li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext22 Level 8;}{\s23\qj \li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext23 Level 9;}{\s24\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext24 _26;}{\s25\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext25 _25;}{\s26\qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext26 _level1;}{\s27\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext27 _level2;}{\s28\qj \fi-720\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext28 _level3;}{\s29\qj \fi-720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext29 _level4;}{\s30\qj \fi-720\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext30 _level5;}{\s31\qj \fi-720\li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext31 _level6;}{\s32\qj \fi-720\li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext32 _level7;}{\s33\qj \fi-720\li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext33 _level8;}{\s34\qj \fi-720\li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext34 _level9;}{ \s35\qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext35 _levsl1;}{ \s36\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext36 _levsl2;}{\s37\qj \fi-720\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext37 _levsl3;}{\s38\qj \fi-720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext38 _levsl4;}{\s39\qj \fi-720\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext39 _levsl5;}{\s40\qj \fi-720\li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext40 _levsl6;}{\s41\qj \fi-720\li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext41 _levsl7;}{\s42\qj \fi-720\li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext42 _levsl8;}{\s43\qj \fi-720\li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext43 _levsl9;}{ \s44\qj \fi-720\li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext44 _levnl1;}{ \s45\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext45 _levnl2;}{\s46\qj \fi-720\li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext46 _levnl3;}{\s47\qj \fi-720\li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext47 _levnl4;}{\s48\qj \fi-720\li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext48 _levnl5;}{\s49\qj \fi-720\li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext49 _levnl6;}{\s50\qj \fi-720\li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext50 _levnl7;}{\s51\qj \fi-720\li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext51 _levnl8;}{\s52\qj \fi-720\li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext52 _levnl9;}{ \s53\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext53 Definition T;}{\s54\qj \li360\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin360\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext54 Definition L;}{\*\cs55 \additive \i Definition;}{ \s56\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs48\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext56 H1;}{\s57\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs36\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext57 H2;}{ \s58\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs28\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext58 H3;}{\s59\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext59 H4;}{ \s60\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext60 H5;}{\s61\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \b\fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext61 H6;}{ \s62\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \i\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext62 Address;}{\s63\qj \li360\ri360\nowidctlpar \tx360\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin360\lin360\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext63 Blockquote;}{\*\cs64 \additive \i CITE;}{\*\cs65 \additive \f2\fs20 CODE;}{\*\cs66 \additive \i \sbasedon10 Emphasis;}{\*\cs67 \additive \ul\cf2 \sbasedon10 Hyperlink;}{\*\cs68 \additive \ul\cf12 FollowedHype;}{\*\cs69 \additive \b\f2\fs20 Keyboard;}{\s70\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx0\tx958\tx1917\tx2876\tx3835\tx4794\tx5754\tx6712\tx7671\tx8630\tx9356\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f2\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext70 Preformatted;}{\s71\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\brdrt\brdrdb\brdrw5\brdrcf1 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f1\fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext71 zBottom of;}{\s72\qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\brdrb\brdrdb\brdrw5\brdrcf1 \faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f1\fs16\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext72 zTop of For;}{\*\cs73 \additive \f2 Sample;}{\*\cs74 \additive \b \sbasedon10 Strong;}{\*\cs75 \additive \f2\fs20 Typewriter;}{\*\cs76 \additive \i Variable;}{\*\cs77 \additive \v\cf6 HTML Markup;}{\*\cs78 \additive Comment;}{ \s79\qj \li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext79 _24;}{\s80\qj \li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext80 _23;}{\s81\qj \li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext81 _22;}{\s82\qj \li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext82 _21;}{\s83\qj \li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext83 _20;}{ \s84\qj \li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext84 _19;}{\s85\qj \li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext85 _18;}{\s86\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext86 _17;}{\s87\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext87 _16;}{\s88\qj \li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext88 _15;}{\s89\qj \li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext89 _14;}{\s90\qj \li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext90 _13;}{\s91\qj \li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext91 _12;}{\s92\qj \li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext92 _11;}{ \s93\qj \li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext93 _10;}{\s94\qj \li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext94 _9;}{\s95\qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext95 _8;}{\s96\qj \fi-720\li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext96 _7;}{\s97\qj \li2160\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext97 _6;}{\s98\qj \li2880\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin2880\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext98 _5;}{\s99\qj \li3600\ri0\nowidctlpar \tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin3600\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext99 _4;}{\s100\qj \li4320\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext100 _3;}{\s101\qj \li5040\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext101 _2;}{ \s102\qj \li5760\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin5760\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext102 _1;}{\s103\qj \li6480\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\faauto\rin0\lin6480\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext103 _;}{\*\cs104 \additive Default Para;}{\s105\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext105 \styrsid16346886 header;}{\s106\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tqc\tx4320\tqr\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext106 \styrsid16346886 footer;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid354822 \rsid8470180\rsid9010509\rsid9193889\rsid12797053\rsid16346886}{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\title IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\author Supreme Court of Guam}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2006\mo3\dy31\hr8\min44} {\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy31\hr8\min45}{\version3}{\edmins1}{\nofpages11}{\nofwords4045}{\nofchars23060}{\*\company }{\nofcharsws27051}{\vern16391}}\margl1440\margr1440\margt2016\margb1080 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\hyphhotz936\notabind\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\subfontbysize\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3 \jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot16346886 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16346886 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16346886 \chftnsepc \par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16346886 \chftnsep \par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid16346886 \chftnsepc \par }}\sectd \psz1\sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1440\titlepg\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid8470180\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx720\tqr\tx9360\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 { \i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Pacific Rock v. Perez (\'93Pacific Rock III\'94)}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , Opinion \tab Page \chpgn of }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid16346886 NUMPAGES \\* ARABIC }}{\fldrslt {\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid8470180 13 }}}{\insrsid16346886 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid16346886 \par }{\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid12797053 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft0\shptop0\shpright0\shpbottom0\shpfhdr0\shpbxmargin\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt0\shpz0\shplid2049 {\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 20}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn lineColor}{\sv 2}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 12192}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 1}} {\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxmargin\dobypara\dodhgt8192\dpline\dpptx0\dppty0\dpptx0\dppty0\dpx0\dpy0\dpxsize0\dpysize0\dplinew19\dplinecor2\dplinecog0\dplinecob0}}} {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft0\shptop7\shpright9360\shpbottom7\shpfhdr0\shpbxmargin\shpbxignore\shpbypara\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt0\shpz1\shplid2050{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 20}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}} {\sp{\sn lineColor}{\sv 2}}{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 12192}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxmargin\dobypara\dodhgt8193\dpline\dpptx0\dppty0\dpptx9360\dppty0 \dpx0\dpy7\dpxsize9360\dpysize0\dplinew19\dplinecor2\dplinecog0\dplinecob0}}}}{\insrsid16346886 \par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pndec\pnstart1 {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnlcltr\pnstart1 {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pnlcrm\pnstart1 {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pndec\pnstart1 {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl5\pnlcltr\pnstart1 {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6 \pnlcrm\pnstart1 {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pndec\pnstart1 {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl8\pnlcltr\pnstart1 {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1 }\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 PACIFIC ROCK CORPORATION,}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par Petitioner-Appellee, \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 vs.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 LOURDES M. PEREZ, \par in her official capacity as Director of Administration, \par Government of Guam,}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par Respondent-Appellant.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Supreme Court Case No.:}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid12797053 CVA03-010}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par Superior Court Case No.:}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 SP0218-02}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 OPINION \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Filed: October 11, 2005 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Cite as:}{\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 2005 Guam 15}{\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Appeal from the Superior Court of Guam \par Argued and submitted on February 20, 2004 \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph120\trrh2670\trleft0\trkeep\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4680\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9360\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sb120\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\ul\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Attorney for Respondent-Appellant:}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Phillip D. Isaac \par Assistant Attorney General \par Office of the Attorney General \par Civil Division \par 287 W. O\rquote Brien Dr. \par Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sa57\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sb120\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\ul\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Attorney for Petitioner-Appellee}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 : \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Thomas M. Tarpley, Jr., }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Esq.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par TARPLEY & MORONI, LLP \par A Law Firm including a Professional}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Corporation \par American Life Bldg. \par 137 Murray Blvd., Ste. 201 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sa57\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Hag\'e5t\'f1a, Guam 96910-5104\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 { \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \trowd \irow0\irowband0\lastrow \ts11\trgaph120\trrh2670\trleft0\trkeep\trftsWidth1\trpaddl120\trpaddr120\trpaddfl3\trpaddfr3 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx4680\clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth4680\clshdrawnil \cellx9360\row }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par BEFORE:}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 F. PHILIP CARBULLIDO, Chief Justice; FRANCES M. TYDINGCO-GATEWOOD, Associate Justice; and ROBERT J. TORRES, Associate Justice. }{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 CARBULLIDO, C.J.: }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \par }{\b\insrsid9010509 \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [1]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Respondent-Appellant Lourdes M. Perez, in her official capacity as Director of Administration, Government of Guam (\'93the Director\'94), appeals from the trial court\rquote s Decision and Order and Judgment granting Petitioner-Appellee Pacific Rock Corporation\rquote s first and s econd petitions for writ of mandate, which ordered the Director to pay Pacific Rock postjudgment interest at the rate of 6% per annum accruing on the judgment in Superior Court Case No. CV1668-94.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Director further appeals from the trial court\rquote s holding that notes issued pursuant to section 22415 of Title 5 Guam Code Annotated (\'93GCA\'94) must include interest at the rate of 7% per annum. }{ \insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [2]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We hold that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to award post-judgment interest to Pacific Rock against the govern ment of Guam and therefore, the trial court erred in upholding the validity of the judgment in Superior Court Case No. CV1668-94.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 We further hold that the trial court properly concluded that notes issued pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415 must bear interest at the rate of 7%.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Accordingly, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and remand to the trial court.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 I.}{\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [3]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In November of 1994, Pacific Rock filed suit in the Superior Court of Guam against the Department of Education (\'93DOE\'94) for the amount of the unpaid balance it claimed DOE owed for the construction of several temporary classrooms.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 After a trial on the merits, the trial court awarded Pacific Rock $514,258.76, plus prejudgment and post-judgment interest.}{\super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 1{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 1}{\insrsid16346886 }{\fs20\insrsid16346886 The Director contends, and Pacific Rock does not dispute, that Pacific Rock in its complaint and amended complaint did not seek prejudgment or post-judgment interest. Neither complaint can be found in the record before us.}}}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 DOE appealed.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [4]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab On appeal (\'93}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock I}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \'94), DOE challenged the trial court\rquote s decision on several grounds, but did not challenge the trial court\rquote s award of post-judgment interest to Pacific Rock on sovereign immunity grounds.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Thus, the issue of sovereign immunity was not addressed by this court in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock I}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 This court reversed the judgment of the trial court.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See Pacific Rock v. Dep\rquote t of Educ.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2000 Guam 19.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock then petitioned for a rehearing of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock I}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [5]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In opposition to Pacific Rock\rquote s petition for rehearing, DOE again did not raise the issue of sovereign immunity with respect to the post-judgment interest awarded to Pacific Rock by the trial court.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 After granting the petition for rehearing, this court affirmed the judgment of the trial court.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See Pacific Rock v. Dep\rquote t of Educ.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 21 (\'93}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock II}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \'94).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In the 2001 opinion, by way of background information, the court recited, but did not discuss, the trial court\rquote s award of post-judgment interest to Pacific Rock.}{\super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 2{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 2}{\insrsid16346886 }{\fs20\insrsid16346886 In }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Pacific Rock II}{ \fs20\insrsid16346886 , 2001 Guam 21, \'b6 10, this court stated: \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid16346886 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid8470180 {\fs20\insrsid16346886 A four-week bench trial was held on August 26, 1996 through September 23, 1996, and subsequently, the trial court ruled in favor of Pacific Rock, denying DOE liquidated damages but awarding Pacific Rock a total of $514 ,258.76 in damages plus prejudgment and post-judgment interest. }}}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [6]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab A few hours after the court issued its opinion in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock II }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 affirming the trial court judgment, the court issued its opinion in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo Construction Co. v. Government of Guam}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2 001 Guam 23, where we held that post-judgment interest cannot be awarded against the government because the legislature did not waive the government of Guam\rquote s sovereign immunity with respect to post-judgment interest.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 DOE, who ultimately lost its appeal, petitioned this court for a rehearing of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock II}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , but again did not challenge the trial court\rquote s decision awarding post-judgment interest to Pacific Rock.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 This court denied DOE\rquote s petition for rehearing.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [7]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab On October 2, 2002, Pacific Rock filed a petition for writ of mandate in the trial court (\'93the Writ Case\'94 ), seeking an order directing the Director of the Department of Administration to pay Pacific Rock\rquote s judgment out of the Government Claims Fund pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 6402.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record, pp. 1-3 (Petition for Writ of Mandate).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The trial court issued the alternative writ on the same day, directing the Director to pay the Pacific Rock judgment out of the Government Claims Fund or show cause why it had not done so.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record, pp. 4-5 (Writ of Mandate).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The show cause hearing was rescheduled and was held on January 10, 2003.}{ \insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [8]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Meanwhile, on December 5, 2002, Pacific Rock and the \'93government of Guam - including the Department of Education,\'94 entered i nto a settlement agreement whereby the government agreed to issue promissory notes \'93pursuant to 5 G.C.A. \'a7 22415,\'94 for the principal amount of the Pacific Rock judgment, in exchange for Pacific Rock\rquote s agreement to relinquish any priority for payment that it may have had for payment out of the Government Claims Fund.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record, pp. 12-15 (Settlement Agreement).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In the agreement, the parties recognized that, while the promissory notes would}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 issue for the payment of the principal amount of the judgment, \'93 the parties are in the process of litigating the validity of the provision for post-judgment interest . . . and the issue of whether interest on the promissory notes is required.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Appellant\rquote s Excerpts of Record, p. 15, \'b6 5 (Settlement Agreement).}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [9]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415, Pacific Rock then sent a letter to the Director, requesting the Director to issue two promissory notes in equal amounts of $263,301.02, one to be payable to Pacific Rock and the other to Thomas Tarpley.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 On October 24, 2002 and December 6, 2001, the trial court in two other unrelated cases issued a Writ of Execution against Pacific Rock, in favor of UOG for $75,220.00 and Dongbu Insurance for $43,355.50.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In both cases, Pacific Rock agreed to satisfy the judgments by tendering a promissory note to each of the two judgment creditors.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [10]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab On December 3, 2002, the Director issued four promissory notes, as follows: }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 1.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 $263,301.02 (Thomas Tarpley)}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 2.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 $120,759.40 (UOG)}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 3.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 $61,126.70 (Dongbu Insurance)}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 4.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 $81,414.92 (Delbert Swegler, owner of Pacific Rock).}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [11]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab A few weeks later, on January 22, 2003, Pacific Rock filed a second petition for alternative writ of mandate, alleging that the Department of Revenue and Tax refused to allow the promissory note to be used as a setoff against income taxes, the ability of Pacific Rock to satisfy the judgment was thus restricted, and therefore sought payment of the judgment out of the Government Claims Fund.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 On the same day, the trial court issued the Second Alternative Writ of Mandate, commanding the Director to pay the judgment out of the Government Claims Fund and give priority to payment of Pacific Rock\rquote s judgment over other claims or show cause why it should not do so.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [12]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The trial court issued a Decision and Order on January 29, 2003, holding, }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 inter alia}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 ,that the award of post-judgment interest at the rate of 6% to Pacific Rock against DOE is valid, and that if promissory notes are issued pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415, that an interest rate of 7% must apply.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Thereafter, on February 14, 2003, the trial court ordered that the principal amount of the Pacific Rock judgment be paid from funds appropriated to the Government Claims Fund as of February 14, 2003. }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [13]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab On March 28, 2003, the trial court issued a Judgment in the Writ Case in favor of Pacific Rock.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 This appeal followed. }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 II.}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [14]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab This court has jurisdiction over an appeal from a final judgment.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 48 U.S.C. \'a7 1424-1(a)(2) (West, W}{\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 estlaw}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 through Pub.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 L.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 109-76 (2005)); Title 7 GCA \'a7\'a7 3107 and 3108(a) (West, }{\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Westlaw}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 through Guam Pub. L. 28-037 (Apr. 22, 2005)).}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [15]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Generally, the grant of a writ of mandate is reviewed to determine whether the court's judgment is supported by substantial evidence.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See Sablan v. Gutierrez}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2002 Guam 13, \'b6 6, citing }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Holmes v. Territorial Land Use Comm'n,}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 1998 Guam 8, \'b6 6. }{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 However, when there are no facts in dispute, and the questions presented for review are strictly questions of law, the court\rquote s review is }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 de novo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{\i\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 When a challenge to post judgment interest rests on sovereign immunity grounds, a lower court\rquote s award of interest is reviewed }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 de novo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo Constr. Co. v. Gov\rquote t of Guam}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 23, \'b6 7.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Issues of statutory interpretation are also reviewed }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 de novo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Bank of Guam v. Reidy}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 14, \'b6 16.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 III.}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [16]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The Director raises two issues on appeal.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 First, we consider whether the trial court erred in finding that the provision for post-judgment interest in the }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock Corp. v. Dep\rquote t of Educ.}{ \super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 3{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 3}{\insrsid16346886 }{ \fs20\insrsid16346886 Superior Court Case No. CV1668-94}}}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 judgment is valid, despite this court\rquote s opinion in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo Construction Co., Ltd. v. Government of Guam}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 23.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Second, we consider whether the trial court erred in finding that if promissory notes are issued to Pacific Rock pursuant to 5 GCA \'a7 2 2415, they must include interest at 7% per annum.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab 1.}{\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Award of Post-Judgment Interest }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [17]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The Director argues that the trial court erred in issuing the writ of mandate ordering the payment of post-judgment interest, despite this court\rquote s}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 holding in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 that the legislature did not waive the government of Guam\rquote s sovereign immunity with respect to such interest.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [18]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Pacific Rock contends that the Director is barred by the doctrine of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 from raising the defense of sovereign immunity at this stage of the litigation and further, that }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 cannot be applied retroactively.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [19]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In response, the Director asserts that because the parties in the Writ Case are different from the parties in CV1668-94, }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 does not bar her from raising the sovereign immunity defense.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Moreover, the Director asserts that because sovereign immunity is a jurisdictional issue, the trial court was without jurisdiction to award post-judgment interest in the first instance and therefore, that portion of the judgment is void.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Director further argues that the principles underlying sovereign immunity outweigh the policies behind the doctrine of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [20]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab At the outset, it is important to note that the parties do not dispute our holding in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 that the government of Guam cannot be held liable for post-judgment interest because the legislature did not waive Guam\rquote s sovereign immunity with respect to such liability.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In other words, it is undisputed that the trial court erred in awarding post-judgment interest to Pacific Rock, against DOE. }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [21]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The real issue therefore is whether the Director is barred by }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 from attacking the portion of the judgment awarding post-judgment interest, when the judgment was appealed from by DOE and affirmed by this court, and where DOE,}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 in its appeal and its petition for rehearing, failed to raise the issue of sovereign immunity.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\keep\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [22]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We first determine whether }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 applies under the facts of this case.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 We find that it does.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \'93Under the doctrin e of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata,}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 a judgment on the merits in a prior suit bars a second suit involving the same parties or their privies based on the same cause of action.\'94}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Trans Pacific Export Co. v. Oka Towers Corp.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2000 Guam 3, \'b6 13 (quoting }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Parklane Hoisery Co. v. Shore}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 429 U.S. 322, 327 n.51, 99 S. Ct. 645 (1979)).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 While the defendant in the prior }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 appeal was DOE (a department of the executive branch of the government of Guam), \'93[a]n official-capacity suit is really just another way of suing the government.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Therefore a city official sued in his official capacity is generally in privity with the municipality.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Conner v. Reinhard}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 847 F.2d 384, 394 (7th Cir. 1998) (citations omitted).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Moreover, prior to its amendment by Public Law 27-142:5, and at al l times relevant to the facts of the instant case, Title 5 GCA \'a7 6402 provided that \'93 [t]he Director of Administration shall pay the amount allowed in an approved settlement or in a final court judgment rendered against any line agency of the government, or the Government of Guam in general.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Title 5 GCA \'a7 6402 (West, }{\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Westlaw}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 through Guam Pub. L. 28-037 (Apr. 22, 2005).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 We therefore find that the Director is in privity to DOE, an executive branch agency of the Government of Guam.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In addition, the petition s for a writ of mandate filed in this case are based on the same causes of action filed in CV1668-94.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Accordingly, under the general rule, }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 would bar the Director in this case from raising the issue of sovereign immunity.}{\super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 4{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 4}{\insrsid16346886 }{\fs20\insrsid16346886 This result might have been different had the parties in the settlement agreement specifically agreed to waive the effects of }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 res judicata}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 . }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 See e.g.}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , 18 }{ \scaps\fs20\insrsid16346886 Charles Alan Wright, Arthur R. Miller & Edward H. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure: Jurisdiction and Related Matters}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , \'a7 4415 (found at West, }{\scaps\fs20\insrsid16346886 Westlaw}{ \fs20\insrsid16346886 , FPP \'a7 4415) (2d ed. 2005) (\'93Just as a }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 res judicata}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 defense may be lost by failure of proper pleading, courts have expressed willingness to honor an express agreement between the parties that an action on one part of the claim will not preclude a second action on another part of the same claim. . . .\'94 ) (footnote omitted). }}}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [23]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The question still remains, however, whether sovereign immunity will lie as an exception to the general rule of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The answer to this question turns on a balance of the policies underlying the finality of judgments and the court\rquote s recognition that sovereign immunity implicates a court\rquote s subject matter jurisdiction and can be raised at any time.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa120\keep\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [24]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo v. Government of Guam}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , we held that \'93sovereign immunity implicates a court\rquote s subject matter jurisdiction . . . . [and therefore] can be raised at any time, either by a party or by the court.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 23 at \'b6 22 (citation omitted).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In other words, if sovereign immun ity applies, the action is barred because of a court\rquote s lack of subject matter jurisdiction.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See Pacific Rock II}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 21 at \'b6 18.}{ \super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 5{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 5}{\insrsid16346886 }{ \fs20\insrsid16346886 In }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Pacific Rock II}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , this court addressed the existence of a statu tory waiver of sovereign immunity with respect to breach of contract claims. Again, sovereign immunity in the context of post-judgment interest was not discussed, although the court made cursory mention of the award in its background portion of the opini on. }}}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , we addressed the issue of sovereign immunity in the context of a direct attack of the trial court\rquote s judgment, and not, as in the instant appeal, in the context of a collateral attack.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See }{\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Black\rquote s Law Dictionary}{\scaps\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (7th ed. 1999) (defining a collateral attack as \'93 [a]n attack on a judgment entered in a different proceeding.\'94).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Because sovereign immunity is treated as a limitation on subject matter jurisdiction, the collateral attack is governed by ordinary rules dealing with the enforcement of judgments where the rendering court\rquote s jurisdiction is challenged.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See Chicot County Drainage Dist. v. Baxter State Bank}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 308 U.S. 371, 376-77, 60 S. Ct. 317 (1940).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Restatement of Judgments offers guidance on when subject matter jurisdiction may be challenged in the post-judgment context:}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 When a court has rendered a judgment in a contested action, the judgment precludes the parties from litigating the question of the court's subject matter jurisdiction in subsequent litigation except if:}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (1) The subject matter of the action was so plainly beyond the court's jurisdiction that its entertaining the action was a manifest abuse of authority; or}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (2) Allowing the judgment to stand would substantially infringe the authority of another tribunal or agency of government; or}{ \insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li1440\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin1440\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (3) The judgment was rendered by a court lacking capability to make an adequately informed determination of a question concerning its own jurisdiction and as a matter of procedural fairness the party seeking to avoid the judgment should have opportunity belatedly to attack the court's subject matter jurisdiction. }{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri1440\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin1440\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Restatement (Second) of Judgments}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \'a7 12 (1982).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [25]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Specifically addressing the issue of sovereign immunity and whether a state may be permitted to collaterally attack an adverse judgment against it on the ground that the state\rquote s immunity deprived the rendering court of subject matter jurisdiction, courts have ruled either way.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Some courts have held that notwithstanding the general rule that jurisdictional challenges may be raised at any time, \'93[i]t is elementary that any jurisdictional defect must be raised while the case is pending.\'94 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 City of South Pasedena v. Mineta, }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 284 F.3d 1154, 1156 (9th Cir. 2002);}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 see also Calhoun v. Bernard}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 359 F.2d 400, 401 (9th Cir. 1966) (refusing to consider issues in a second appeal that could have been raised during the first appeal).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In these courts, this rule applies}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 to the government\rquote s failure to invoke its immunity.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See City of South Pasadena, }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 284 F.3d at 1156-57 (}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 citing}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Gunter v. Atl. Coast Line R.R.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 200 U.S. 273, 290, 26 S. Ct. 252 (1906)) (holding that a state who fails to invoke its immunity while the litigation is pending cannot do so after the lawsuit has ended because any defenses \'93whether brought to the attention of the co urt or waived, were foreclosed by the decree.\'94).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See also}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Restatement (Second) of Judgments \'a7 12, Reporter\rquote s Note, cmt. d (discussing the case history with regard to sovereign immunity and }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , it explains that \'93[g]iving such effect to the sovere ign immunity doctrine proves too much, for it is possible to say that any \'93erroneous\'94 judgment against the government violates the scope of its waiver of immunity.\'94).}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sa120\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [26]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Consistent with}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 the above authority, Pacific Rock relies primarily on }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States v. County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , a Seventh Circuit case which held that \'93 if the court decides a case on the merits after an adversarial presentation, the judgment cannot be collaterally attacked on the ground that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The parties\rquote failure to address jurisdiction fully or cogently does not deprive the judgment of force.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States v. County of Cook}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 167 F.3d 381, 388 (7th Cir. 1999).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , the United States refused to pay interest and penalties on real estate taxes pursuant to a judgment entered against it and affirmed by the court on appeal.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id.}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 383.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 There, the United States argued that the interest and penalties were barred by sovereign immunity, regardless of its lawyer\rquote s failure to} {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 invoke the immunity during the prior appeal.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 court turned its focus on whether the principle of sovereign immunity is a recognized exception to the finality of judgments rule.} {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Disagreeing with the United States, the court stated:}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 For a long time i t has been understood that the United States, like a private litigant, cannot relitigate claims that have reached final judgment.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States v. Stauffer Chemical Co.}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 464 U.S. 165, 104 S. Ct. 575, 78 L.Ed.2d 388 (1984);}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States v. Moser}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 266 U.S . 236, 45 S. Ct. 66, 69 L.Ed. 262 (1924).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (The special treatment of offensive nonmutual issue preclusion, see }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States v. Mendoza}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 464 U.S. 154, 104 S. Ct. 568, 78 L.Ed.2d 379 (1984), does not qualify this rule when identical parties contest the sequential suits.)}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Likewise it is settled that a "claim" for purposes of this rule means all legal theories bearing on a set of facts; an omitted argument cannot be raised later.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Nevada v. United States} {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 463 U.S. at 129-30, 103 S. Ct. 2906.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 To create a sovereign-immunity exception to these principles would be to abolish them, for }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 every }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 suit involving the interests of the United States potentially involves sovereign immunity.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id. }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 385.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [27]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In contrast to the above body of case law, the United States S upreme Court allowed an attack of a judgment after an adjudication on the merits, where the issue involved a government\rquote s sovereign immunity.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See United States v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 309 U.S. 506, 60 S. Ct. 653 (1940)}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (involving federal sovereign immunity);}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Jordon v. Gilligan}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 500 F.2d 701 (6th Cir.1974), }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 cert. denied}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 421 U.S. 991, 95 S. Ct. 1996 (1975) (involving state government immunity).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [28]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (\'93}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 USF&G}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \'94), the case relied upon by the Direct or, the Supreme Court held that collateral estoppel does not preclude the government from invoking sovereign immunity in a royalties claim that had been actually decided in a previous action brought by the government.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 United States Fidelity & Guar. Co.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 309 U.S. 506, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The government did not raise the sovereign immunity defense in the original action, and the court adjudged the royalties claim adversely to the government.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 510, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The government then brought a second a ction, and United States Fidelity & Guaranty argued that the government was collaterally estopped from challenging the first decision.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 511, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Court held, however, that sovereign immunity cannot be waived by the action of gover nment officials by their failure to raise the sovereign immunity defense in the preceding action.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 513-14, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 This is so because consent to be sued may only be granted by Congress. }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 514, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Court further held that \'93[t]he reasons for the conclusion that this immunity may not be waived govern likewise the question of }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 . . . . Consent alone gives jurisdiction to adjudge against a sovereign.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Absent that consent, the attempted exercise of judicial power is void.\'94}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 514, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Weighing the policy underlying the finality of judgments against the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the court stated that in the \'93 collision between the desirable principle that rights may be adequately vindicated through a single trial of an issue and the sovereign right of immunity from suit .}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 We are of the opinion . . . [that] the doctrine of immunity should prevail.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 See id.}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 514-15, 60 S. Ct. 653.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 } {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Thus, the Court recognized that the \'93desirability for complete settlement of all issues between parties must . . . yield to the principle of immunity.\'94 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id.}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 513, 60 S. Ct. 653. }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [29]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We agree with the policy considerations and the law as laid out by the Court in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 USF&G}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 and hold that }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 does not bar a sovereign Director from asserting the government\rquote s sovereign immunity and attacking the validity of the trial court judgmen t granting post-judgment interest against DOE in favor of Pacific Rock.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [30]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The policy considerations supporting the finality of judgments, weighed against the doctrine of sovereign immunity \endash }{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 which we have held to be a unwaivable jurisdictional issue \endash compel us to agree with the Court that, where there exists a \'93 collision between the desirable principle that rights may be adequately vindicated through a single trial of an issue and the sovereign right of immunity from suit, . . . the doctrine of immunity should prevail.\'94}{\i\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Id. }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 at 514-15}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 ;}{\i\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 see also}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 }{ \i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Danning v. United States}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 259 F.2d 305, 311 (9th Cir.1958) (citing }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 USF&G}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 for the proposition that \'93 failure to appeal an adverse judgment does not work an estoppel against the government\'94); }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sterling v. United States}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 85 F.3d 1225, 1231 (7th Cir.1996)}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 (Flaum, J.) (concurring) (stating the rule a \'93judgment is afforded no }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 res judicata}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 effect if the claim should have been dismissed on the ground of sovereign immunity . . . [thus] if a court reaches the merits of a claim that is barred by sovereign immunity, the judgment is simply void\'94).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Stated simply, sovereign immunity cannot be waived by the action (or inaction) of the government of Guam officials and their failure to appropriately raise the sovereign immunity defense.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Rather, under section 1421a of the Organic Act of Guam, \'93sovereign immunity can }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 only}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 be waived by duly enacted legislation.\'94}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2003 Guam 21, \'b6 9 (emphasis added).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [31]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab In so holding, we reject the analysis employed by the Seventh Circuit in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 . Significantly, and unlike the law of our jurisdiction, the Seventh Circuit declined to view sovereign immunity as a}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 jurisdictional doctrine.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , the court stated: }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 For most purposes it overstates the strength of sovere ign immunity to analogize it to a lack of jurisdiction. Any difference between the two should make it easier to raise a jurisdictional objection belatedly than to raise a sovereign-immunity objection belatedly. As we have explained, what sovereign immunit y means is that relief against the United States depends on a statute; the question is not the competence of the court to render a binding judgment, but the propriety of interpreting a given statute to allow particular relief.}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 County of Cook}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 167 F.3d at 388 -389.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 In particular, the court\rquote s view that sovereign immunity is not an issue of a court\rquote s jurisdiction conflicts with our express holding in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 that \'93 [s]overeign immunity implicates a court's subject matter jurisdiction.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2001 Guam 23, \'b6 22.}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [32]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We therefore reverse the trial court\rquote s holding that the portion of the judgment entered in CV1668-94, granting post-judgment interest against the government of Guam, is valid.}{\super\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 6{\footnote \pard\plain \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sa240\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8470180 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\super\insrsid16346886 6}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 This result is not, as the trial court appears to conclude, a matter of }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 being applied retroactively. The government of Guam enjoys sovereign immunity \'93in the absence of an express statutory waiver of immunity against postjudgment interest\'94 and therefore \'93 the government is not liable for such interest.\'94 }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , 2001 Guam 23 at \'b6 27. The existence of sovereign immunity, while discussed and clarified by this court in }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , exists not merely as a result of }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Sumitomo}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 , but rather, by virtue of the Organic Act of Guam. \'93The Organic Act provides a very specif ic mechanism by which the government of Guam\rquote s inherent sovereign immunity may be waived. Under the Organic Act, a waiver of immunity must be in the form of duly enacted legislation.\'94 }{\i\fs20\insrsid16346886 Id}{\fs20\insrsid16346886 . at \'b6 24 (citing Title 48 U.S.C. \'a7 1421a). }}}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 2.}{\b\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Interest on Promissory Notes}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [33]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab The next issue for our consideration is whether the trial court erred in holding that promissory notes issued pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415 must bear an interest of 7%.} {\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Specifically, the Director argues that because }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 holds that the legislature has not waived the government of Guam\rquote s immunity with respect to post-judgment interest, then the principal amount of the judgment, reduced to promissory notes pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415, cannot bear an interest of 7%, because the interest would constitute \'93post-judgment interest.\'94}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pacific Rock argues that Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415 applies to all \'93creditors \'94 of the government of Guam.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Further, Pacific Rock contends that the plain reading of the statute calls for an interest rate of 7%, and does not implicate this court\rquote s holding in }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Sumitomo}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 .}{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [34]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415, entitled \'93Promissory Note; Issuance to Creditors,\'94 states in relevant part: }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Any creditor}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 of the government of Guam (}{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 other than a tort claimant with an unadjudicated claim}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 ) who is not paid within thirty (30) days of filing his claim may file a request for the Director of Administration for issuance of a one year negotiable promissory note payable to bearer from the Government of Guam, bearing interest at 7% per annum.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Title 5 GCA \'a7 24415 (West, }{\scaps\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Westlaw}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 through Guam Pub. L. 28-037 (Apr. 22, 2005).}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [35]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab \'93In cases involving statutory construction, the plain language of a statute must be the starting point.\'94 }{\i\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Pangelinan v. Gutierrez}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 , 2000 Guam 11, \'b6 23.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 A plain reading of the above provision indicates that it applies to \'93any creditor\'94 of the government of Guam, except tort claimants with unadjudicated claims.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 It does not except from the statute judgment creditors, a position argued by the Director.}{ \insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 The Director provides no authority in support of her position that the 7% interest does not apply to judgment creditors and further, that the interest on the promissory note constitutes \'93post-judgment interest\'94 if the creditor is a judgment creditor.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [36]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We therefore affirm the trial court\rquote s holding that notes issued pursuant to section 22415 for payment of the principal amount of the judgment must bear interest at 7% per annum. }{\insrsid9010509 \par \par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 IV.}{\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\insrsid9010509 \par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid9010509 {\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 [37]}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 \tab We hold that the trial court erred in upholding the validity of the portion of the judgment in CV1668-94 awarding post-judgment interest against DOE.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 We further hold that the policies and principles underlying the rule of finality of judgments are outweighed by the doctrine of sovereign immunity.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Lastly, we hold that the trial court properly concluded that notes issued pursuant to Title 5 GCA \'a7 22415 must bear interest at the rate of seven percent (7%) per annum.}{\insrsid9010509\charrsid9010509 }{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 Accordingly, we }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 REVERSE}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 in part, }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 AFFIRM}{\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 in part, and }{\b\insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 REMAND}{ \insrsid16346886\charrsid9010509 for entry of judgment consistent with this opinion.}{\insrsid9010509 \par }}