Does collateral estoppel bar a plaintiff from challenging the defendants' failure to exhaust administrative remedies defense?

No question identified. : Branden Lratg lad Plauntité= Appellant , A Erle SelrS,c¢ al, , _ De fen dent -Appellee Appeal bravn the United StabeS Court of Afreals For Th Eleventh Cirewt K rit¢ ot Appellant & tancln Worl $$$ Ga pra-Se Brandon Lraly wood GDL# 1277460 200| Gordan Kl Gravetas GA $0813 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES (1) Does collateral estoppel bar a Plaintiff from challenging the Defendants’ failure to exhaust administrative remedies defense when exhaustion is a matter of abatement not on the merits of the Plaintiffs claim and the district court dismissed the Plaintiffs first action without prejudice? (2) Did the district court err applying collateral estoppel because the Plaintiff's second action alleged materially different facts undermining the Defendants’ exhaustion defense and the Plaintiff did not have a full and fair opportunity in the first action to obtain discovery and present evidence on exhaustion? | 1 fn bf t tA hats. Plan tvtt hes Adowted fla Brief From Detanber (Jhere Attorney S t00k fats {tm Plaint€t and Lote a Definatwe an Campreh ens: VV pret, Plan Wee asses t§ ht Should nat be Alsgua ALA upon him by 1A Defences in thiS Che. LF given ple oppretun ty the plaintifl Can Shot phure tle pemedle Ler Lylowe £n Wak Z plaintife Jost Avs vision contd Could ror Con tine « Th A. DA Altos people to kere hele bith regal prottas bud pken an mmoke needs helo WS very hotd to ob tain. Wood v. Sellers, et al. CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS AND