ROOSEVELT — More than 600 plaintiffs seeking redress from the federal government for terminating them or their ancestors as members of the Uinta Band of Ute Indians have been given a second chance to continue their legal battle.

At issue is whether the federal circuit court judge who dismissed their complaint one year ago properly applied a specific law when he determined their case was filed after the statute of limitations had expired.

Friday, a three-judge panel from the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case of Felter v. Kempthorne back to U.S. District Court Judge Richard W. Roberts in Washington, D.C., for review.

In January 2006, Roberts sided with the federal government, ruling that the allegations against it for wrongdoing in the 1950s and 1960s in connection with the Ute Partition Act were filed 35 years too late.

According to Roberts' decision, lead plaintiff Oranna Felter of Roosevelt should have filed her claims in 1967 at the very latest. Felter was a young girl at the time the Uinta Band members who had less than 50 percent Ute blood had their names stricken from tribal rolls.

The appellate court has directed Roberts to consider whether the terminated Utes had access to their financial records and received an accounting of what had transpired before ruling that the statute of limitations had run its course in the case.

Attorney Dennis Chappabitty of Sacramento, Calif., who represents the plaintiffs, has said his clients have never received any accounting throughout the course of their legal battles to have the Ute Partition Act declared invalid.

"We all stuck in there behind our attorney who has proudly stood up and fought a lonely battle for us terminated mixed-blood Uintas and our descendants," said Felter. "All of the members on our case have been dedicated to seeing this case through, and we appreciate their support and prayers."

There are 668 individuals listed as plaintiffs in the complicated civil court complaint. Felter said the recent court ruling has a sweet taste of victory because through the past 54 years the group has been "kicked out of the court, ridiculed by the BIA, the Ute Indian Tribe and our own congressional delegation."

The litigation seeks relief for alleged injustices inflicted on members of the Uinta Band of Ute Indians who were terminated from tribal membership rolls with the implementation of the 1954 Ute Partition Act. The lawsuit claims the termination act was flawed and that the federal government acted illegally in carrying it out.