against an alien who is removable by reason of having committed” an aggravated felony. Id. § 1252(a)(2)(C). An exception applies, however, to petitions for review that raise questions of law. See id. § 1252(a)(2)(D) (“Nothing in sub-paragraph' (B) or (C), ... which limits or eliminates judicial review, shall be construed as precluding review of constitutional claims or questions of law raised upon a petition for review filed with an appropriate court of appeals in accordance with this section.”). Dormescar has raised two questions of law over which we have jurisdiction. See 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(2)(D). The first is whether res judicata bars him from being found removable based on his 2007 counterfeiting conviction. See Singh v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 561 F.3d 1275, 1278-80 (11th Cir.2009) (<HOLDING>); see also Maldonado v. U.S. Att’y Gen., 664
holding that the court can raise res judicata sua sponte even on appeal holding that res judicata applies when the question of jurisdiction is raised and determined holding that an order stricken as addressing a premature claim is not res judicata as to the merits of the claim holding that res judicata prevents relitigation of a claim that was previously the subject of a valid and final decision of this court recognizing that  1252a2d provides this court with jurisdiction over questions of law and addressing petitioners res judicata argument even though he had been convicted of an aggravated felony