Haan

*595 MEMORANDUM *

William S. Smith appeals from the judgment of dismissal of his claims brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) on the basis of his failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Smith proceeded pro se in the district court, but was represented by appointed counsel on appeal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We vacate and remand.

Smith first argues that the exhaustion requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) do not apply to ADA actions. This argument is foreclosed by both the language of the statute and a Supreme Court case. See 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) (“No action shall be brought with respect to prison conditions under ... [ 42 U.S.C. § 1988 ], or any other Federal law, by a prisoner confined in any jail, prison, or other correctional facility until such administrative remedies as are available are exhausted” (emphasis added)); Porter v. Nussle, 534 U.S. 516, 532 , 122 S.Ct. 983 , 152 L.Ed.2d 12 (2002) (“[T]he PLRA’s exhaustion requirement applies to all inmate suits about prison life, whether they involve general circumstances or particular episodes, and whether they allege excessive force or some other…