Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
system expressly state that “[i]nmates may also pursue available remedies in State and Federal court.” 37 Pa.Code § 93.9(b). Even assuming, arguendo, that Paluch’s complaint includes federal claims, to which federal law would apply, Paluch’s “tolling while exhausting” argument is belied by his own evidence, which supports the conclusion that he did not exhaust his administrative remedies. Under Section 1997e(a), an inmate must exhaust the administrative remedies available at the state prison. Williams v. Beard, 482 F.3d 637, 639 (3d Cir.2007). “ ‘[P]roper exhaustion’ [means] that the prisoner must comply with all the administrative requirements and not merely wait until there are no administrative remedies ‘available.’” Id. (citing Spruill v. Gillis, 372 F.3d 218, 234 (3d Cir.2004) ). The “administrative remedies available at
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that if adequate administrative remedies are available it is improper to seek relief in court before those remedies are exhausted
B. holding that a plaintiff may not avoid exhausting the administrative remedies by requesting money damages
C. holding that the ftca bars claimants from bringing suit in federal court until they have exhausted their administrative remedies
D. holding that a procedural default in exhausting administrative remedies bars relief in federal court
E. holding that declaratory judgment was inappropriate where after exhausting administrative remedies a contractor would have to bring separate actions against the state and other parties in state court
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.