The order has been signed, but the haze has far from cleared in the fight over the state's new anti-smoking law.

Although some businesses, such as MGM Mirage properties, have complied with the smoking ban, others allow patrons to puff away.

Delays in complying have been blamed on confusion over the law, with many business owners looking for guidance from the Southern Nevada Health District.

But health officials had been waiting for District Judge Douglas Herndon's written order on a legal challenge to the smoking ban. The order was signed Friday, but the health district wasn't rushing to enforce the ban.

Officials said they're taking a careful look at the law and the judge's order before handing out information to businesses subject to the smoking ban.

"We were not involved in the writing of this law, so there are some things that are still unclear to us," health district spokeswoman Jennifer Sizemore said Friday afternoon.

"We don't want to start doing things too quickly that could be done incorrectly. We don't want to do anything that would open the law up to more litigation."

A group of bar and tavern owners challenged the smoking ban before it took effect Dec. 8, saying it was unconstitutionally vague.

In an oral ruling from the bench on Dec. 21, Herndon rejected a request from those business owners to stop the smoking ban from taking effect, although he did remove any criminal penalties under the law. His signature on a written order Friday made that ruling official.

The ruling affects only businesses involved in the lawsuit, including PT's Pubs, Village Pubs and the Nevada Tavern Owners Association, which has about 220 members.

All other businesses are subject to the original law, which includes both criminal and civil penalties.

Nevada voters passed the Nevada Clean Indoor Air Act in November. It bans smoking in most indoor public places, including grocery stores, restaurants and bars that serve food. Casino floors were exempted from the ban.

More than a month after the ban took effect, compliance across the state has been a mixed bag, said Michael Hackett, campaign manager for the act.

In Northern Nevada, most businesses seem to be embracing the smoke-free requirement, but it's a different story in Clark County, he said.

Although some businesses have complied with the smoking ban, others allow smoking, he said.

Most holdouts are looking for guidance, he said.

"They want to comply. They just want to make sure they do the right thing," Hackett said.

Scooter Johnson, general manager of the Outside Inn in Summerlin, counts himself in that group.

Leading up to the November election, his employees wore T-shirts supporting Question 4, a less restrictive anti-smoking initiative. But Johnson said he'll comply with the new law once he knows what he must do.

"We are absolutely going to comply," he said Friday. "I don't have a choice. If I have to comply to keep my gaming license, then it'll happen."

The Southern Nevada Health District hopes to have new information for businesses in the next week or two, Sizemore said.

Before the smoking ban was challenged in court, the health district posted on its Web site information about the law and guidelines for businesses on how to comply.

That information was removed after the legal challenge was filed, Sizemore said.

Health officials will revise the information as needed to fit Herndon's order before providing it to the public again, she said.

Health officials said they will focus on education before enforcement. The health district will continue taking smoking complaints from the public and will target establishments with large numbers of complaints with more education and possibly enforcement, she said.

"Obviously we're not going to catch people in the act,'' Sizemore said.

Another hearing in the courtroom battle over the smoking ban will be held Jan. 23. After that hearing, Herndon is expected to decide on the constitutional merits of the smoking ban.

No matter what the judge rules, Hackett expects a drawn-out legal fight.

"I'm pretty sure we're going to end up before the Nevada Supreme Court again," he said.