From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: Laurence Cherniak has a motion coming up in Toronto   
   Federal Court on Tuesday morning Feb 18 9:30am for:   
   a) an Order declaring that the Letter of Exemption issued to   
   Applicant under S.56 of the CDSA does not satisfy the   
   Court's Order dated Jan 20 2014 that Applicant's   
   Authorization To Possess and Personal-Use-Production-License   
   under the MMAR shall be extended;   
   b) an Order of Mandamus that the original order of the court   
   dated Jan 20 2014 be complied with.   
      
   JCT: After his specialist being rejected, Laurence submitted   
   a Form B1 from a new doctor that needed no new specialist.   
   If they had rejected him, then for sure, he would have   
   needed them to comply with extending the ATP and PUPL   
   because the S.56 would have been insufficient relief.   
      
   Here's their response earlier today:   
      
   From: MMAP-PAMM    
   Subject: Fw: MMAD-33336-13, Court Order T-164-14,   
   Application Form B1 and its I.D. Photos.   
      
   Date: February 14, 2014 at 2:04:17 PM EST   
   To: info@laurencecherniak.com   
      
   Dear Mr. Cherniak,   
      
   We received your email on 11 February, 2014, at 5:17, which   
   included a new B1 form. Health Canada is now in receipt of   
   your complete application. We note that the newly provided   
   Form B1 cites a different medical condition than your   
   original application for renewal of your Authorization to   
   Possess (ATP) marihuana for medical purposes and your   
   Personal Use Production Licence (PUPL).   
      
   The new form B1 is signed by a medical practitioner other   
   than the four practitioners you provided in your original   
   renewal application, and someone other than both the   
   specialist named by your original medical practitioner (this   
   specialist declined to support your application) and the   
   specialist whose name you provided in your most recent   
   application (he also indicated he was unable to support your   
   application). Further, the newly submitted form B1 sets out   
   a new, increased daily dosage, from 115 grams per day to 200   
   grams per day. Finally, we have become aware that addresses   
   previously provided to Health Canada are inaccurate.   
      
   As a result of the changes from previous authorizations,   
   Health Canada has concluded that your current application,   
   as amended by the form B1 sent 11 February 2014, effectively   
   constitutes a new application, rather than a renewal of a   
   previous application. Effective October 1, 2013 it is no   
   longer possible to apply for a new PUPL or Designated Person   
   Production Licence (DPPL), or to amend a PUPL or DPPL to   
   change the location of the production site, or to increase   
   the number of plants associated with the licence.   
      
   Individuals may continue to seek to renew their existing ATP   
   and PUPL without these changes, but any renewed documents   
   will expire on March 31, 2014. For your convenience, a copy   
   of the Marihuana Medical Access Regulations is attached.   
      
   On the basis of the unique circumstances of your situation   
   and the information provided in your amended application   
   forms, Health Canada has processed your application as an   
   application for renewal of your previous ATP and PUPL.   
      
   Health Canada has corrected the clerical address errors, on   
   the understanding that your physical production site has not   
   actually changed.  The ATP and PUPL reflect the previously   
   approved daily dosage of 115 grams per day.  Your new ATP   
   and PUPL, which will both expire March 31, 2014, have been   
   sent to you by Canada Post Xpresspost.   
   Sincerely,   
   Stephane Lessard, Director   
   Bureau of Medical Cannabis   
   Controlled Substances and Tobacco Directorate   
   Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch   
   Health Canada   
      
   JCT: So they didn't want to deal with his Amended   
   Application for 120 grams since it was the one that didn't   
   have the doctor. But when they used the B1 as acceptance for   
   renewal of his previous 115 grams, why wasn't the   
   prescription also passed along for 120 grams?   
      
   Anyway, he is no longer in any of the jeopardy from S.5(2)   
   of the Criminal Code and has his right to use his ATP as a   
   "medical document" and his PUPL to transfer his genetics to   
   a Licensed Producer. So they're going to argue that now that   
   they've safetied him, his motion on Tuesday is moot.   
      
   Maybe Relief B has been satisfied but Relief A hasn't been:   
   a) an Order declaring that the Letter of Exemption issued to   
   Applicant under S.56 of the CDSA does not satisfy the   
   Court's Order dated Jan 20 2014 that Applicant's   
   Authorization To Possess and Personal-Use-Production-License   
   under the MMAR shall be extended.   
      
   Since they use S.56 Exemptions whenever they're in a jam,   
   the least they can do from now on is provide protection   
   against S.5(2) and that can only be forced with a   
   declaration that what they gave Laurence at first wasn't   
   good enough. We paid to ask and have the right to know. Har   
   har har. A good show on Tuesday even with Health Canada   
   backing down. Still time to get their condemnation of their   
   trying to short-change Laurence.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)