What degree of conduct following the first judgement is necessary to give rise to a new claim?

QUESTION PRESENTED 1. What degree of conduct following the first judgement is necessary to give To rise to a new claim? Storey, 347 F.3d 383. See eBay INC .v MercExchange. L.L., C., 547 U.S. 388. 391 92006). 2. What is generally considered a judgement on the merits? See Greenberg v. — Bd. Of Governors of the fed. Reserve Sys. 968 f.2d 164, 168-70 (2d Cir.1992). 3. Whether Jurisdiction of this matter arises under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 with federal question claims is found involving Title VII of the Civil Rights Act Of 1964 at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f) (3) and other unlawful employment practice 42. U.S.C § 2000e-3(a), What is the basic record supported final judgement on the merits that federal court attempted to reached regarding section 42 U.S.C § 1981 and breach of contract violation claim prior suit before determining of the Claim Preclusion? Was the claim decided in the prior suit the same claim being presented in the action in question? without seen affidavit and deposition what make the case insufficient? 4. Whether, under § 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act (““LMRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 185(a), U.S federal court must find that a violation of collective bargaining has occurred before it can exercise jurisdiction. 5. Whether, under this Circuit’s recognize Yard-Man analysis, UAW v. YardMan, 716 F.3d 1476, 1479 (6th Cir. 1983). Does plaintiff have to fulfill various prerequisites to exhaust administrative remedies though the completion of the EEOC regarding section 1981 and breach of contract violation claim? 6. Whether declaratory and preliminary injection claim can simple deny without due process of law, what is the meaning of due process of law as set out in the 5° and 14° Amendments? What is standing under article VII? what is the doctrine of wavier and estoppel? When equitable tolling applies under the law? , 7. Whether plaintiff’s fact sufficient and plausible on its face claim timely demand left out and remain undecided, federal court judgement decision contrary to the record of tangible affidavit evidence, deposition evidence, discovery evidence, employees evidence on court file against both defendants acted unlawful prior suit. It very true based on the relevant record evidence plaintiff deserved as prevail part. ii