Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
graduating class. 3 . The exhaustion requirement of IDEA is not required in certain circumstances. Where the plaintiff is not seeking relief “also available” under the IDEA, exhaustion is not a prerequisite to the filing of a civil action. Blanchard v. Morton Sch. Dist., 420 F.3d 918, 922 (9th Cir.2005) (emotional distress injuries and lost income for parent); but see Robb v. Bethel Sch. Dist., 308 F.3d 1047, 1049-50 (9th Cir.2002) (plaintiff cannot avoid exhaustion requirement merely by limiting relief to money damages, which is not available under IDEA). Exhaustion is not required where educational issues are not at dispute. See Witte, 197 F.3d at 1275 (where claim for monetary damages could proceed because all educational issues had already been resolved); Blanchard, 420 F.3d at 921 . Similarly, when the validity of a blanket
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a claimants claim is barred when administrative remedies that are clearly required under an erisa plan are not exhausted
B. holding that the remedies are exclusive
C. holding that administrative remedies must be exhausted prior to filing a claim in court
D. holding that if adequate administrative remedies are available it is improper to seek relief in court before those remedies are exhausted
E. recognizing that ideas administrative remedies cannot compensate injuries that are completely noneducational
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.