Where a federal employee failed to exhaust administrative remedies for all protected activities

QUESTIONS PRESENTED I. Where a federal employee’s administrative complaint under the Whistleblower Protection Act identifies the Agency’s adverse actions and seeks relief pursuant to the WPA, but identifies only some of the protected activities alleged to contribute to the adverse action, did the Ninth Circuit correctly hold, in conflict with the First, Fourth and Seventh Circuits, that the employee failed to properly exhaust administrative remedies as to the omitted protected activities? Il. Where the Whistleblower Protection Act, 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8)(A)Q), prohibits retaliation because of “(A) any disclosure of information by an employee or applicant which the employee or applicant reasonably believes evidences—(i) any violation of any law, rule, or regulation”; and at § 2302(b)(9)(A)(i) prohibits retaliation because of “the exercise of any appeal, complaint, or grievance right granted by any law, rule, or regulation—(i) with regard to remedying a violation of paragraph (8)”; and where Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16, prohibits discrimination against federal employees on the bases of, inter alia, gender and reprisal, did the Ninth Circuit correctly hold that the WPA does not protect federal employees from reprisal for filing a sexual harassment and retaliation complaint? Ill. Ifa prior adjudication held that certain protected activities were not properly exhausted, is the whistleblower’s subsequent complaint raising those protected activities barred by res judicata? i DIRECTLY