29 Jan 2013 – date of received letters from Seattle office that the consulate is closed, that Los Angeles will continue examinations for dependents, and to refrain from sending enquiries to L.A. consulate for at least 90 days after receipt of the letter (Feb 2013).
14 June 2013 – received letter from L.A. requiring medicals for non-accompanying dependents (all 4) plus IMM 0008, IMM 5669, IMM 5406, birth certificates, passport bio page, colour photos meeting CIC requirements within 60 days.
24 June 2013 – Ex-wife refused to allow me to have children examined. I contacted my lawyer in Pittsburgh, and finally she relented 26 June and I could schedule appointments.
29 July 2013 – medicals performed on three youngest children in Pittsburgh, PA. Oldest child, age 19, refused to comply. I had subsequent discussions with call centre and emails with LA that my oldest daughter refused and had legal rights to decline (I had no legal rights to force her to comply).
2 Aug 2013 – emailed L.A. to inform them of the medical results being sent.
6 Sept 2013 – emailed L.A. enquiring on whether medical information was received as I had not heard from them.
1 Oct 2013 – received email response from 6 Sept email to L.A. concerning my oldest child enquiring if she lives in the US.
2 Oct 2013 – replied to L.A. affirming she lives in the US, attends college there, and informing that she refused to be examined by a CIC physician.
24 Nov 2013 – letter informing me that my oldest daughter needed to be examined and information submitted by 24 Feb 2014 else my application would be refused.
27 Nov 2013 – emailed my daughter and begged for her to comply with CIC medical exam request.
28 Nov 2013 – email from my daughter refusing to comply, stating that I have no rights to force her to do so because of her age.
29 Dec 2013 – sent letters to CIC detailing all I had attempted to do to make my daughter comply and the reason I could not force her including her quoted responses to me.
3 Feb 2014 – sent notarized letter (lawyer’s stamp) to CIC requesting removal of the requirement to have my oldest daughter examined
6 Feb 2014 – L.A. informed Vegreville that the 3 youngest children met the requirements and passed medical examinations.
3 Mar 2014 – letter from CIC stating why I said I could not have my oldest daughter examined, requiring her to be examined, and requiring compliance by 3 June 2014
4 Mar 2014 – sent statutory declaration (lawyer’s stamp) to CIC requesting removal of the requirement to have my oldest daughter examined
20 Mar 2014 – letter from CIC accepting removal of the requirement to have my oldest daughter examined