No. 22-3050 ___________________________

Steven L. Pinder

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

WellPath, LLC, also known as Correct Care Solutions LLC, et al.

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Delta ____________

Submitted: January 11, 2024 Filed: August 9, 2024 ____________ Before LOKEN, KELLY, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________ LOKEN, Circuit Judge.

Arkansas inmate Steven Pinder filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in October 2020 against correctional defendants. The pro se complaint sought declaratory and injunctive relief and substantial damages, alleging that Defendants’ deliberate indifference to Pinder’s serious medical needs stemming from several continuing medical issues violated his Eighth Amendment rights. He appeals the district court’s final order granting summary judgment to two Defendants on Pinder’s claim of deliberative indifference to the orthopedic condition of his right shoulder, and the court’s earlier interlocutory dismissal of his other claims for failure to establish IFP status. We granted his pro se motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal and appointed appellate counsel. Defendants filed an opposed motion to revoke Pinder’s appellate IFP status, tendering new medical evidence that he was not in imminent danger when the appeal was filed. We took the motion under advisement. For the reasons that follow, we remand the motion to revoke IFP status on appeal to the district court, and we also remand the issue whether the interlocutory dismissals were proper for further consideration in light of a recent Eighth Circuit opinion addressing that issue. We need not rule on the grant of summary judgment at this time.

I. Background

Pinder is an inmate in the long-term custody of the Arkansas Department of Corrections (“ADOC”). Proceeding pro se, he filed this lawsuit against numerous Defendants including Wellpath, LLC, the medical care contractor for ADOC; numerous Wellpath employees; Diamond Drugs, Inc., the provider of prescription drugs for ADOC inmates; and Rory Griffin, Deputy Director of ADOC. Pinder alleged that Defendants acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment by failing to provide adequate care for numerous ailments and conditions -- severe glaucoma, peptic ulcers, acid reflux condition, diabetes, the orthopedic condition of his right shoulder, and the denial of timely prescribed and over-the-counter medications.

The district court threatened dismissal for failing to pay the court’s filing fees. Pinder moved for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and (b)(1-3), which authorize a district court to allow an indigent prisoner to bring a civil action, or appeal a judgment in a civil action, without prepayment of filing fees, upon payment of an initial partial filing fee, with the remainder of the filing fee to be paid in monthly installments. The district court noted

-2- that Pinder appeared to be an indigent prisoner ineligible for IFP status under the “three strikes” provision in § 1915(g), added to § 1915 in the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”):

(g) In no event shall a prisoner bring a civil action or appeal a judgment in a civil action or proceeding under this section if the prisoner has, on 3 or more prior occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any