Here is the most recent opinion in Questar Exploration & Prod. Co. v. Lambeth (D. Utah): Questar v Lambeth — DCT Order re State Law Claims.

An excerpt:

Under these provisions, the Subject Property was originally an allotment, encumbered bythe restriction on alienation and the trust relationship of the United States. However, under the Ute Partition and Termination Act, when Ms. Lambeth elected to receive treatment as a mixedblood member, the Secretary of the Interior was required to transfer the property to Ms. Lambeth in fee simple. Thus, Ms. Lambeth received unrestricted control of the Subject Property and the restrictions on the sale or encumbrance of the property, as well as the trust relationship of the United States, were removed upon the granting of the 1960 Patent. As a result, the Court finds that Ms. Lambeth had unrestricted fee title to the Subject Property.

Lambeth argues that additional briefing is required on the issue of how the fee patent could be issued. This question is answered by the Ute Partition and Termination Act. As stated,the Act authorized and directed the Secretary of the Interior “to immediately transfer to [a mixedbloodmember] unrestricted control of all other property held in trust for such mixed-blood member by the United States, and shall further remove all restrictions on the sale or encumbrance of trust or restricted property owned by such member of the tribe, and Federal supervision of such member and his property shall thereby be terminated.” This is precisely what happenedwith the issuance of the 1960 Patent. Therefore, no further briefing is required on this issue.