10th Cir.

Arguello v. Mullin, et al.

June 15, 2026 ·2:25-CV-00786-RJS ·Panel Decision · By Raj Patel

The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit dismissed an appeal as moot after the government rescinded the removal order that was the subject of the litigation. The court found that the plaintiff received the relief he sought and that no live controversy remained for judicial review.

Listen to this decision 0:00 / 1:06

Background

Ricardo Jose Perea Arguello, a Venezuelan citizen, sought a temporary restraining order to prevent his removal under a reinstated order of removal while his asylum application was pending. During the appeal, his asylum application was denied, and the Department of Homeland Security rescinded the notice of intent to reinstate his prior removal order. A new final removal order was entered against him, which became enforceable after he failed to appeal within the statutory timeframe.

The court’s reasoning

The court held that it lacks jurisdiction to entertain a moot appeal. A case is moot when it is impossible for the court to grant any effectual relief to a prevailing party. The government demonstrated that the rescission of the reinstatement order and the finality of the new removal order eradicated the effects of the alleged violation. The voluntary cessation exception did not apply because there was no reasonable expectation that the alleged violation would recur and the effects were completely eradicated.

What it means going forward

The dismissal leaves the underlying district court order in place without vacatur, as the court found no continuing injury to justify judicial intervention or equitable relief.