# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 3- 36 77

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Larry W ayne Jo ne s
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.
Cu rti s M ei nz er, Ass is ta nt W ard en , Varn er Su pe rm ax , ADC; J am es Ban ks , W ard en , Varn er Un it , ADC; Larry D. May, Chi ef Dep ut y Dire ct or , Arka ns as Dep art m en t o f Co rrec ti on ; Wend y Kell ey , Direc to r, Arka ns as Depa rtment o f Co rrec ti on ; Be nn y

Mag ne ss , Cha irman, Arka ns as Bo ardof C or rect io n; Mary Park er, Vic e Ch ai rm an , Arka ns as Bo ardof C or rect io n; Ken J on es , Mem be r, Ark an sa s B oa rdof C orrect io n; Drew Bak er, Me m be r, Arka ns as Bo ardof Co rrec ti on ; Al on za J il es , Mem be r, Arka ns as Bo ardof C or rect io n; Bo bb y Glo ve r, Mem be r, Arka ns as Bo ardof C or rect io n; Jan is W al m sl ey , Secre ta ry , Arka ns as Bo ardof C orrect io n; Jo hn Fel ts , Mem be r, Arka ns as Bo ardof C orrect io n; Ty ro nn e Bro om fie ld , Mem

be r, Arka ns as Bo ardof C or rect io n
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Eas te rnDis tri ctof Ark an sa s - P in e Bl uf f

__ __ __ __ __ __ Subm it te d: Ju ly 23, 2 01 5 Fi le d: Ju ly 28, 2 01 5 [Publ is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re WOL LMAN, SMITH, an d B ENTON, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __PER CURI AM.

In 2 0 12 , Ark an sa s in m at e Larry Jo ne s in it ia te d th e in st an t act io n rai si ng a ch al le n g e un de r th e Rel ig io us Lan d Use an d In st it ut io na li zed Pers on s Act to th e Ark an sa s Dep art m en t of Co rrec ti on ’s (ADC’s) gr oo m i n g p o li cy , an d se ek in g in jun ct iv e rel ie f. The di st ric t c o u r t gr an te d su m m ary jud gm en t fo r de fen da nt s, rel y in g on th is co ur t’s de ci si on in Hol t v. Hob bs , 50 9 Fed

. App x. 56 1 (8 th Ci r. Ju ne 12 , 20 13 ) ( u n p u bl is he d pe r cu ria m ). Whi le th e in st an t ap pe al was pe nd in g, th e Supr em e Co ur t gr an te d ce rt iora ri in Hol t, an d rev ers ed , ho ld in g th at ADC’s gr oo m in g po li cy su bs ta nt ia ll y bu rd en ed th e pl ai nt iff in m at e’s ex erci se of rel ig io n. See Hol t v. Hob bs , 13 5 S. Ct

. 85 3 (J an

. 20 , 20 15 ). Fo ll owi ng th e Supr em e Co urt’s de ci si on , we gr an te d ap pe ll ees ’ m ot io n to supp le m en t t h e r e c o rd on ap pe al wit h ADC’s ne w gr oo m in g p ol ic y , effec ti ve Feb ru ary 6, 2 01 5.

Co ns is te nt wit h ou r pr io r or de r de nyin g ap pe ll ees ’ m ot i o n t o di sm is s th is ap pe al as m oo t, we co nc lu de on ce ag ai n- -in res po ns e to th e ren ewed m oo tn es s arg um en ts in ap pe ll ees ’ ap pe al br ie f--t ha t Jo ne s’s ap pe al ha s no t be en pl ai nl y m oo te d by th e ne w gr oo m in g po li cy

. C f

. C h a f i n v
. Ch afi n, 13 3 S. Ct

. 10 17 , 10 23 (2 01 3) (ap pe al sh ou ld be di sm is se d as m oo t whe n, b y vi rtu e of in te rv en in g ev en t, co ur t of

a p p e al s can no t gr an t “ an y effe ctua l rel ie f wha te ve r” in fav or of ap pe ll an t). We de cl in e to reac h th e m eri ts of th is ap pe al , ho wev er, an d wil l rem an d th is m at te r to th e di st ric t co ur t to co ns id er Jo ne s’s com pl ai nt in li gh t of the ne w gr oo m in g po li cy an d th e Supr em e Co urt’s de ci si on in Hol t. See Sch weis s v. Ch ry sl er Mot or s Corp ., 92 2 F.2 d 47 3, 47 6 (8 th Ci r. 19 90 ) (n ot in g be ne fit of ha vi ng di st ric t co ur t ad dr es s is su e in fir st in st an ce).

Acco rd in gl y , we va cat e th e jud gm en t of the di st ric t co urt, an d rem an d (1 ) fo r
co ns id erat io n of whe th er Jo ne s is en ti tl ed to rel ie f un de r Hol t, (2 ) fo r a ru li ng on hi s req ue st to am en d hi s co m pl ai nt to ad d n e w c l a i ms fo r in jun ct iv e rel ie f, an d (3 ) fo r
co ns id erat io n of ap pe ll ees ’ p r e v i o u sl y rai se d arg um en t be lo w th at on e or m or e of

-2

-Jo ne s’s ex is ti ng cl ai m s fo r in jun ct iv e rel ie f are ba rred un de r Heck v. Hum ph rey, 51 2 U.S. 47 7 (1 99 4)

.

-3

-