With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". the applicable commission prior to filing a complaint for damages. Compare 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(d) (setting forth pre-complaint procedures and conditions for receipt of a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC), with § 28-5-24.1(c)(2) (giving complainants ninety days from receipt of a right-to-sue letter from the RICHR to file suit). It is appropriate to consider federal cases that have addressed the issue of whether a plaintiff can rely on the absence of a right-to-sue letter to avoid the bar of res judicata. Federal courts have held that employment discrimination claimants cannot escape the preclusive effect of a final judgment on state law grounds by arguing the lack of a right-to-sue letter from the EEOC. See, e.g., Jang v. United Technologies Corp., 206 F.3d 1147, 1149 (11th Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>); Brzostowski v. Laidlaw Waste Systems, Inc.,

A: holding race and gender discrimination claim barred
B: holding age discrimination claim barred
C: holding that regarded as claim was reasonably related to claim of discrimination on the basis of disability
D: holding disability discrimination claim barred
D.