Given a paragraph about movies and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.
--------
Question: CONTEXT: Under civil law frameworks based on common law (which we have in the US), there is the doctrine of res judicata -- or "already judged." Once the appeals process is complete, or the time frame for filing appeal has run out, res judicata states that the suit cannot be brought again, even for new evidence (there are exceptions, such as proof of fraud). Its purpose is to strike a balance between the rights of the defendants and plantiffs as well as to make the courts run more efficiently ... kind of like the principle of double jeopardy under criminal law. The U.S. military has affirmed it holds to the doctrine of res judicata. So in this episode, where the time for an appeal of the original case had likely long expired, it could not be brought again, as it would be dismissed as already ruled upon.  <sep>  Q: Does it seem to you that The Good wife season 4 episode 6 ending was wrong? A: where the time for an appeal of the original case had likely long expired, it could not be brought again, as it would be dismissed as already ruled upon  Q: Do you have legal knowledge to confirm that facts presented were mainly wrong? A: Under civil law frameworks based on common law (which we have in the US), there is the doctrine of res judicata -- or "already judged  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What are the grounds to reopen a military case?

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: IMDb credits are generated by the filmmakers themselves (for smaller, independent productions) or representatives for the filmmakers/producers. On occasion crew and cast members get left off the submission form. I speak from experience as I appear as three different entities on IMDb because the filmmakers I worked for neglected to see if I was already represented and created a new page for me each time. This is certainly the case with other actors/crew members, and could go some way to explaining the discrepancies you have discovered. Bottom line is IMDb is not infallible, and it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites in order to confirm the actor you are researching is the right one.  <sep>  Q: How to correctly identify an actor/actresses is in something that is not listed on their IMDB profile? A: it would indeed require some serious cross-checking with other sites  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: If it's not listed on IMDB or their wiki page, then how can i make sure if the actor/actress is the one I believe they are?

Answer: Yes


Question: CONTEXT: The comic states that the Radioactive spider was created by experimenting on Peter Parker's blood (by Oscorp). However, there is no mention of this in the movie whatsoever. There are two possibilities: 1) That the spider in the film was also part of some lab experiments based on the blood of Peter Parker of that universe (the one who dies). 2) That the spider came from another universe. The question then is "how did the spider get to the universe before the portal was opened?". The answer to that would be "The spider came from another universe and traveled back in time just like Gwen did". However, to keep things simple, we can assume that Oscorp was up to no good and were experimenting with Peter's blood and Miles got bit by it. We already know that happened in the comics.  <sep>  Q: Which dimension did the radioactive spider which bit Miles come from? A: The comic states that the Radioactive spider was created by experimenting on Peter Parker's blood  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: What happened after the experiments took place?

Answer:
No