From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: The Registrar has accepted the automatic Motion for   
   extension of time in our nine Applications for Leave to Appeal   
   the Federal Court of Appeal letting Phelan play doctor and the   
   Crown, not only having responded to our Applications, has   
   bothered to also ask to not extend the time for a day:   
      
   May 27 2016   
   VIA COURIER   
      
   Mr. Roger Bilodeau, Registrar,   
   Supreme Court of Canada   
      
   Mr. Registrar:   
      
   Re: John C. Turmel v. HMTQ Court file No. 36937   
      
   CR: Please accept this letter as the response of the   
   respondent, Her Majesty The Queen ("Canada") to the   
   applicant's motion for extension of time to seek leave to   
   appeal in this matter. Canada requests that the applicant's   
   motion be dismissed.   
      
   JCT: You have to wonder why they bother? The judges are going   
   to read the Application to see if it gets an extension of time   
   by virtue of its importance. And wouldn't they look angry   
   rejecting the applications of so many patients for being a day   
   late. But the Crown has now made it an opposed issue!! Dumb.   
   It's doubtful that letting patients stay cut off from their   
   meds will influence them, it never has before, but at least we   
   get more judges names on shameful decisions.   
      
   I sent in a Reply:   
      
   John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,   
   50 Brant Ave., Brantford, N3T 3G7,   
   Tel/Fax: 519-753-5122, johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   June 1 2016   
   VIA FASCIMILE 613-996-9138   
      
   Mr. Roger Bilodeau, Registrar,   
   Supreme Court of Canada   
      
   Mr. Registrar:   
      
   Re: John C. Turmel v. HMTQ Court file No. 36937   
      
   1. Please accept this letter as the Respondent's Reply to   
   applicant's motion for extension of time to seek leave to   
   appeal in this matter. Canada ("CR") requests that the   
   applicant's motion be dismissed.   
      
   2. CR: The Court may extend the time to ask leave to appeal   
   "under special circumstances." The power to extend time has   
   been described as a discretionary one. In exercising this   
   discretion, the Court may have regard to (1) whether the   
   applicant formed a bona fide intention to seek leave to   
   appeal within the prescribed time,   
      
   3.Canada knows the date they were served on time.   
      
   4. CR: (2) whether the applicant moved diligently,   
      
   5. Canada knows they were served on time.   
      
   6. CR: (3) whether a proper explanation for the delay has   
   been offered,   
      
   7. Canada should have suspected documents served on time   
   were probably late due to the Priority Post.   
      
   8. CR: (4) the extent of the delay,   
      
   9. The extent of Priority Post's delay was 1 day.   
      
   10. CR: (5) whether an extension would unduly prejudice any   
   party,   
      
   11.Can Canada be so prejudiced by a 1-day extension of time?   
      
   12. CR: and (6) the merits of the leave application.   
      
   13.If the applications of patients cut off from their   
   medicine has no merit, that should be the grounds of   
   dismissal, not Priority Post being a day late.   
      
   14. CR: The applicant has provided no explanation for his   
   delay in seeking leave to appeal.   
      
   15. Applicant hopes the explanation for a package posted on   
   time with a reputable courier that arrives a day late may be   
   more obvious to the Court than the Respondent.   
      
   Yours truly,   
      
      
   _____________________________   
   John C. Turmel   
   Applicant   
      
   CC: Jon Bricker for the Respondent: Fax: 416-973-0809   
      
   JCT: Boy, did they ever waste their time and give me the   
   chance to make fun of them.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)