TURMEL: Crown seeks to stay Mid-50 Plaintiffs like Ethier JCT: 50 http://facebook.com/groups/appleorangeresistance plaintiffs got the Crown response today to stay their cases. The day after Michel Ethier filed his appeal of the stay order of Case Management Judge Mandy Aylen, the Crown resonds to stay the next 50: Department of Justice Canada Ontario Regional Office National Litigation Sector Benjamin.Wong VIA EMAIL Our File Number: LEX-500040961 April 20, 2021 Federal Court 90 Sparks Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 Dear Ms. Craigie: Re: PATERSON.... Vetricek CR: I am writing on behalf of the defendant in the above- noted matters, Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada ("Canada"), in response to the Court's April 8, 2021, direction. I ask that you kindly place this letter before the case-management judge, Madam Prothonotary Aylen. Canada agrees that the Court's proposal to stay the above- noted claims pursuant to s 50(1)(b) of the Federal Courts Act pending final determination in T-130-21 and any appeal therefrom. A stay will ensure the just, most expeditious, and least expensive determination of the issues raised in the claims. The reasoning underlying the Court's Order dated April 8, 2021, to temporarily stay the claims in T-138-21, T-171-21, T-208-21, T-219-21, T-212-21, T-220-21, T-221-21, T- 230-21 and T-242-21 (the "Initially Stayed Claims") are equally applicable to the present claims.1 A number of plaintiffs have filed submissions requesting that their claims not be stayed, but similar to the submissions by the plaintiffs in the Initially Stayed Claims, the plaintiffs' arguments centre on their concerns about being kept informed regarding the status of T-130-21.2 The Court has held that these concerns do not give rise to prejudice or harm because JCT: At this stage, keep in mind that on April 19, the day before this letter, Michel Ethier filed an appeal of Case Management Judge (CMJ) Mandy Aylen's order staying his action pending the decision for the Lead plaintiff because: CR: the recorded entries in T-130-21 are available for viewing on the Court's website, the plaintiffs can obtain updates on the status of T-130-21 on his website, and the Registry will provide a copy of any final determination in T-130-21 to each of the plaintiffs.3 JCT: So Michel appealed all three of those not good grounds to cut him out of the documentary loop: .lm5 The grounds of the appeal are that: - Plaintiff must decide whether to have my action move forward with insufficient information; - checking the registry file is like checking an index without getting the book; JCT: You can read it at http://SmartestMan.Ca/c19ayla1.pdf And check for yourselves. This is the Registry page to access different files including your own or mine as he's talking about. https://www.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/court-files-and-decisions/court-files#cont Once there, click on "Search by Court Number." Then type in your T-number-21, or mine T-130-21 Click "Submit" (return won't work) Click "More" Magnifying Glass There you'll find minutes on the administration of the documents but you can't link to the documents themselves. As for getting the Final decision, Michel claimed: - getting the final decision with the arguments that were made limits my ability to decide whether I want to pursue my action if Turmel's is dismissed when I don't know the arguments he made that did not win; 8. The Final decision is a judicial conclusion. It cannot cite all the arguments in the memoranda of both sides nor the case law in the Books of Authorities. That cannot help me much decide whether my case is different enough to proceed. And as for watching the Lead's website for updates, Michel wrote: - vigilant watching for updates is not as infallible as getting it in the email and not watching at all; JCT: And here we have the Crown repeating that they can remain apprised by referring to the three points we've debunked on the appeal as useless. Those are his best cards? I wonder if he even read Ethier's appeal before writing this. CR: Canada accordingly requests that the Court stay the above-noted claims pending the final determination of T-130- 21. However, if the Court decides not to stay the claims of those plaintiffs who do not consent to a stay, Canada requests that it be permitted to serve and file a single motion to strike those claims. Sincerely, Benjamin Wong JCT: So if she doesn't stay the others 50, then she'll have to keep them on the style of cause like Phelan J. had and like we've requested. Like in this letter. Everyone's name is on it. So he's admitting that what we want is no problem when he asks to do it the in a similar way. You have to wonder how she can say no. But it's going to take 2 weeks before Michel's appeal can get before a judge. So is she going to mooten the appeal by giving the 50 and Ethier what they want? Or cut out the other 50 and let them join appeals with Ethier before his decision comes down. Notice only Michel filed the appeal, no one else. Just in case he gets hit with costs, it's better only one take the bite. Though it's usually been $150 in previous cases. Even when the Crown asked for $250, they only got $150 as recently as Gisele Pilon's case. And if a judge overturns her decision to let Ethier get emailed the documents, all the Initial 9 will get the same remedy. then the Mid-50 whether she throws them out of the loop now or not. Fascinating but it won't take long. Of course, if Ethier loses, he can appeal to 3 judges without disturbing anything below since he's not there any more, right? Once she cut him out of being involved, what he does elsewhere to get back in has no bearing on our business any more.