ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

In this appeal, the Chapter 13 Trustee challenges a final Confirmation Order in a Chapter 13 Plan entered by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Mexico. The Amended Order Confirming First Amended Chapter 13 Plan was entered on June 15, 2009, and incorporates by reference the reasoning set forth in the Order on Confirmation of Debtor’s Chapter 13 Plan entered on May 6, 2009. The Trustee appealed to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP), raising an issue of first impression in this Circuit. The BAP then certified the bankruptcy order as appropriate for direct appeal to this court, see 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(2)(A)® and (ii), because it involved a question of law as to which there was no controlling decision of this court or the Supreme Court, and because it raised a question of law requiring resolution of conflicting decisions. We granted the Trustee permission to appeal. We later abated the appeal pending a decision from the Supreme Court in a case raising the very same issue raised in this appeal.

In January, the Supreme Court decided Ransom v. FIA Card Servs., NA., — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 716, 178 L.Ed.2d 603 (2011), holding that “[a] debtor who does not make loan or lease payments may not take the car-ownership deduction” in the “means test” formula under Chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code. 131 S.Ct. at 721. In light of the holding in Ransom and its direct applicability in this appeal, the bankruptcy court’s Amended Order Confirming First Amended Chapter 13 Plan (and the earlier confirmation order incorporated by reference) is REVERSED, and the matter is REMANDED to the bankruptcy court for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court’s decision.