. . "Michael Ross, Petitioner v. Shaidon Blake"@en . . . . "The Prison Litigation Reform Act\u2019s requirement to exhaust administrative remedies does not have a \u201Cspecial circumstances\u201D exception, but inmates are only required to exhaust administrative remedies that are genuinely available to them."@en . "--03-29"^^ . . . "1076336557"^^ . . . . "Ross v. Blake"@en . . . . "Thomas"@en . . . "25920.0"^^ . "Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that \"special circumstances\" cannot excuse an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, but clarified that inmates are required to exhaust only administrative remedies that are genuinely available. In so doing, it vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit."@en . "15"^^ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsburg, Alito, Sotomayor"@en . "Ross v. Blake"@en . . "15610"^^ . "2016"^^ . . "--06-06"^^ . . "___"@en . . "578"^^ . "Michael Ross, Petitioner v. Shaidon Blake"@en . . . . . . "2016"^^ . . "Breyer"@en . "Kagan"@en . . . . . . . "Ross v. Blake, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that \"special circumstances\" cannot excuse an inmate's failure to exhaust administrative remedies before filing a lawsuit under the Prison Litigation Reform Act of 1995, but clarified that inmates are required to exhaust only administrative remedies that are genuinely available. In so doing, it vacated and remanded the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit."@en . . . "172800.0"^^ . . . . "50737013"^^ . . . . . .