From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: It seems Priority Post were a day late in delivering my   
   package of Applications for Leave to Appeal the Federal Court   
   of Appeal's refusal to grant them Interim Exemptions for   
   Personal Medical Use. And so the Registry has alerted everyone   
   that they need to file a Motion for an Extension of Time.   
      
   Of course, my motions include the Ali Baba Open Sesame words   
   that professional lawyers cannot use. So I've written to the   
   Court telling them I'm not getting patients to run around   
   filing for extensions of time! I might, but not them.   
      
   John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,   
   50 Brant Ave.,   
   Brantford, N3T 3G7,   
   Tel/Fax: 519-753-5122,   
      
   May 18 2016   
   VIA FASCIMILE   
      
   Ms. Suzanne Sarazin   
   Supreme Court of Canada Registry   
   Tel: 613-947-0827, Fax: 613-996-9138   
      
   Ms. Sarazin:   
      
   RE: John C. Turmel v. HMTQ No. 36937   
      
   I am writing with respect to the sufficiency of my   
   motion for an extension of time within my Application for   
   Leave to Appeal.   
      
   I know lawyers can't include a motion to fix any   
   irregularity they missed so that justice may be done. But I   
   don't have that professional pride so for the past three and   
   a half decades, I have included in all my motions the   
   request:   
      
       AND FOR ANY ORDER abridging any time for service or   
       amending any error or omission which this Honourable   
       Court may allow.   
      
   The purpose is two-fold. It eliminates the need to file   
   motions to correct any errors but it also makes it a   
   decision by the judge whether to summarily allow it, not by   
   the Registry.   
      
   In this case and most others, I'd expect that the judge may   
   note the application is one day late due to a problem with   
   Priority Post and summarily extend the time.   
      
   Though I am not sick, the problem is that all the other   
   applicants are. Sharon Misener just got out of hospital for   
   her cancer and I'm supposed to get her to run around   
   backwoods Ontario serving and filing a separate motion   
   asking for ANY ORDER abridging any time for service when   
   that motion is already included to avoid exactly that kind   
   of imposition on them.   
      
   I submit that the question of whether or not to extend her   
   time to file by a day is a matter now before the court, no   
   longer before the registry. Sharon's motion for extension is   
   filed already, I really can't suggest she file another.   
      
   Even should the the application for more time eventually be   
   denied, putting that question to the Court is a gamble she   
   has a right to take. A gamble we all have the right to take.   
      
   If insisted upon, I will file a separate motion to extend   
   time that tries to explain why Priority Post didn't deliver   
   on time. And leave the fate of others to the request within   
   the Application.   
      
   So, with regard to the patient applicants' state of health,   
   I ask the Registry to reconsider the sufficiency of the   
   Motion to extend time that is already moved within the   
   Applications of all.   
      
      
   _____________________________   
   John C. Turmel   
      
   CC: Jon Bricker for the Respondent: Fax: 416-973-0809   
      
   JCT: So I'll file if they make me but no one else will. Let's   
   see if the Magic Words get it to a judge.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)