Reyes et al v. United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
ESGGAR REYES and FREDERICO REYES
VASQUEZ,
Plaintiffs,
v.
UNITED STATES IMMIGRATION AND
CUSTOM ENFORCEMENT; KRISTI NOEM,
in her official capacity as Secretary of the
Department of Homeland Security; and
MICHAEL BERNACKE, in his official capacity
as the Director of the Sale Lake City ICE field
office,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER DISMISSING CASE AS MOOT
2:25-cv-01159
Judge Tena Campbell
Before the court is a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which was filed by
Plaintiffs Esggar Reyes and Frederico Reyes Vasquez on December 23, 2025. (ECF No. 2.) The
court granted that motion in part in an order issued on December 24, 2025. (Mem. Decision &
Order, Dec. 24, 2025, ECF No. 3.) The court then ordered briefing concerning the remainder of
the relief requested by the Plaintiffs—namely, an injunction ordering Defendant United States
Customs and Immigration Enforcement (ICE) to turn on its phones or otherwise establish a
method by which the families of detained persons and their counsel may receive information
about a detainee’s status and location.
In their response, the Defendants maintain that the Motion for a TRO—and, indeed, the
case—is moot because the phone connectivity problems “were the result of a technological
malfunction and the system is presently working.” (Defs.’ Resp., ECF No. 16 at 3; Decl. Evan
Case 2:25-cv-01159-TC Document 20 Filed 02/02/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 1
of 3

2
Tjaden, ECF No. 16-2 at ¶¶ 5–6.) The Plaintiffs agree that the phones are now working and that
the injunctive relief they seek has therefore been achieved. (Pls.’ Not., ECF No. 17 at 2.) The
Plaintiffs do not oppose dismissal of this action on the grounds that the case is now moot. (Id.)
The court agrees that the case is moot and therefore dismisses the action for lack of a live
controversy. But the court notes its concern with the Defendants’ assertion that there is only one
employee currently responding to calls:
ERO SLC [i.e., the Salt Lake City Field Office for the Enforcement and Removal
Operations (ERO) branch of ICE] is short staffed due to retirements, staff
reassignments, and assignment detail to outside Areas of Responsibility (AORs)
by our agency’s headquarters. Since December 18, 2025, ERO SLC has had one
person manning the public telephone line. Due to the staffing shortage, it is not
possible at this time to have additional personnel answering the public telephone
line.
(Tjaden Decl. ¶ 4.) To the extent that ICE continues to detain immigrants within the jurisdiction
of the Salt Lake City Field Office, the court urges the agency to address its staffing shortage as
soon as possible to ensure that its administrative staff is able to process the number of
immigrants who are being detained. As the court has previously noted, detained persons,
whether citizens or noncitizens, have due process rights and the right of access to counsel. (See
ECF No. 3 at 3.) Communication difficulties in this case and other matters have resulted in
confusion about a detainee’s location, as well as potential violations of the court’s orders. (See,
e.g., id. at 1–2.)
In another matter, the court has found that a revised interpretation of the Immigration and
Nationality Act (INA) proposed by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), under
which a large class of immigrants is subject to mandatory detention under 8 U.S.C. § 1225, is
unlawful. Tanchez v. Noem, No. 2:25-cv-1150, 2026 WL 125184, at *10 (D. Utah
Jan. 16, 2026). If ICE continues to detain noncitizens without a bond hearing under the authority
Case 2:25-cv-01159-TC Document 20 Filed 02/02/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 2
of 3

3
of § 1225 while that issue is considered by other courts, the agency must be prepared for
additional lawsuits, requests about a detainee’s status and location, and the need to respond to
court orders.
ORDER
For the reasons stated above, the court DISMISSES this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE
as moot.
DATED this 2nd day of February, 2026.
BY THE COURT:
______________________________
Tena Campbell
United States District Judge
Case 2:25-cv-01159-TC Document 20 Filed 02/02/26 PageID.<pageID> Page 3
of 3