ANDREW NACIONALES Applicant v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION, 2017 FC 150

Date: 20170207 Docket: IMM-5357-16 Citation: 2017 FC 150 Vancouver, British Columbia, February 7, 2017 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr.

Justice Shore BETWEEN:ANDREW NACIONALESApplicantandTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATIONRespondent ORDER AND REASONS (Delivered orally from the Bench on February 7, 2017) [1] UPON the Court having received a Motion from the Applicant for a stay of removal order in regard to a removal order set forFebruary 9, 2017; [2] AND UPON having read the material on file; [3] AND UPON having heard counsel for the respective parties at a hearing at General Sittings this day; [4] RECOGNIZING that the Applicant has a history of criminal convictions in Canada; [5] UNDERSTANDING that the criminal convictions history has culminated in the Applicant having been issued a deportation order asfar back as September of 2009; [6] UNDERSTANDING as per the history of the Applicant in Canada, that he did have continuing criminal conviction activity forwhich his stay of deportation was thus set aside; [7] UPON the Applicant’s criminal activities subjecting the public to risk; [8] FURTHERMORE recognizing that no pertinent evidence demonstrates alleged mistreatment when the Applicant resided in thePhilippines for a four year period after the said diagnosis of mental illness due to bipolar disorder; [9] RECOGNIZING that the evidence and submissions before the PRRA officer did not demonstrate cumulative discrimination whichcould be considered persecution to his person; [10] As per Ponniah v Canada (MCI) 2013 FC 386, country condition evidence of a general nature, in and of itself, cannot point to apersonal threat to circumstances of an applicant; [11] Furthermore, without corroborative evidence of a personal risk in respect of allegations, the PRRA officer cannot be faulted for thelack of specific evidence on the part of the Applicant; the Applicant’s mental health history demonstrates that the bipolar disorder beganwhen the Applicant was 15 years of age, and living in the Philippines; [12] UNDERSTANDING, that even without treatment, no manic or depressive symptoms were evident; [13] RECOGNIZING that according to the Applicant’s family, he was doing well and was mainly subject to sleep patternabnormalities; the Applicant’s family in Canada preferred together with the Applicant that he not take the medication for his bipolardisorder due to skepticism of the medication regime; [14] As the tripartite test criteria of the Toth v Canada (MEI), (1988) (FCA), 86 NR 302 (FCA) test have not beenmet by the Applicant for any one of the criteria, the stay of removal motion is dismissed (Direct reference is also made to the Judgmentin Beaumont v Canada (MPSEP), 2007 FC 787 of Mr.

Justice Michael Phelan); ORDER THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that that the stay of removal motion is dismissed. “Michel M.J. Shore” Judge FEDERAL COURT

FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-5357-16 STYLE OF CAUSE: ANDREW NACIONALES v THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 7, 2017 order AND REASONS: SHORE J. DATED: FEBRUARY 7, 2017 APPEARANCES : Lobat Sadrehashemi For The applicant Ryan Dawodharry For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Embarkation Law Corporation Vancouver, British Columbia For The applicant William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada Vancouver, British Columbia For The Respondent