Remember the charges of obstruction of justice and conspiracy that were dropped against former Penn State Administrators Tim Curley, Gary Schultz, and Graham Spanier last month (including an additional charge of perjury against Schultz and Spanier)? Prosecutors are now asking a Pennsylvania appeals court to reconsider their dismissal, according to the Associated Press.

Prosecutors are now arguing the charges, which were dropped due to a ruling that Sandusky-era general counsel Cynthia Baldwin violated the three men’s right to legal representation and whose testimony was not admissible in court, should be heard by a county judge in Harrisburg. Furthermore in the case of who was representing whom, prosecutors believe Baldwin’s actions were not improper and think the men should be re-charged with the respective accounts.

As of Friday, there is an entry for application for reargument in each of Curley, Spanier, and Schultz’s dockets filed by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.

On January 22, a group of three judges including Pennsylvania Superior Court Judge Mary Bowes agreed with the trio of former administrators that Baldwin’s testimony was a violation of attorney-client privilege to originally have the charges overturned, and Bowes later ordered that sealed notes of testimony from the claim of attorney-client privilege be unsealed.

The decision can still be appealed to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court. Regardless of the charges in limbo, all three men are still facing failure to report suspected child abuse and endangering the welfare of children, and Curley still holds on to his count of perjury.