instrument. Therefore, the determination as to whether the exceptions to the prior exhaustion rule provided for in that article apply to the instant case must be made prior to and separate from the analysis of the merits, since it depends on a standard of appreciation different from that used to determine the violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention.10 [10] Therefore, the Inter-American Commission clarifies that the causes and effects that have prevented the exhaustion of domestic remedies in this case will be analyzed, as applicable, in the IACHR’s report on the merits of the case, to determine whether they in fact constitute violations of the American Convention. 2. Deadline for presentation 37. Article 46.1.b of the American Convention requires that petitions be submitted within six months of notification of the final judgment. Article 32.2 of the IACHR’s Rules of Procedure stipulates that when the exceptions to the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable, the petition shall be presented within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Inter-American Commission, considering the circumstances of each case. 38. The IACHR said supra that an exception to the rule for prior exhaustion of domestic remedies is applicable, so it must determine whether the petition was submitted within a reasonable period of time. In the circumstances of the instant case, the Inter-American Commission notes that the petition was lodged on October 16, 2002, several years after the start of the administrative process for demarcation of the Xucuru indigenous land, but before it was completed, since it has not been completed to this date. Based on the specific circumstances of the matter, particularly the allegations of an allegedly unwarranted delay in the administrative process of demarcation of the indigenous territory, the IACHR considers that the petition was submitted within a reasonable period of time, and therefore satisfies the requirement of Article 32.2 of its Rules of Procedure. 3. Duplication of proceedings and international res judicata 10 IACHR, Report Nº 19/07, Petition 170-02, Admissibility, Ariomar Oliveira Rocha, Ademir Federicci and Natur de Assis Filho, Brazil, March 3, 2007, para. 27; Report Nº 23/07, Petition 435-2006, Admissibility, Eduardo José Landaeta Mejía et al., Venezuela, March 9, 2007, para. 47; Report Nº 40/07, Petition 665-05, Admissibility, Alan Felipe da Silva, Leonardo Santos da Silva, Rodrigo da Guia Martins Figueiro Tavares et al, Brazil, July 23, 2007, para. 55. 13