CAT/C/66/D/820/2017 6.2 The Committee recalls that, in accordance with article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention, it shall not consider any complaint from an individual unless it has ascertained that the individual has exhausted all available domestic remedies. 6.3 The Committee notes the State party’s argument that the complainant filed an appeal with the Federal Administrative Court, against the decision of the Secretariat of State for Migration of 7 March 2016 on 11 April 2016, i.e. outside the legally established time limit, which is why this appeal was rejected. The Committee further observes that the complainant did not justify her failure to comply with this formality, that she therefore did not exercise due diligence by exhausting the remedies at her disposal in time, and that she is not in a position to attribute the fault to the State party. The Committee is therefore of the view that domestic remedies have not been exhausted and finds the complaint inadmissible in accordance with article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention. 6.4. The Committee therefore decides: (a) That the communication is inadmissible under article 22 (5) (b) of the Convention; (b) That the present decision shall be communicated to the complainant and to the State party. 6 GE.19-12298