zardoz said:While superficially the cases are similar, there are a lot of nuances in the referred to case that make it more compelling. The appellant had no access to the child before immigrating and was well established in Canada long before the sponsorship attempt.
I think that's exactly what canadianwoman meant in her last paragraph. While the above is an example where an appeal succeeded, the H&C circumstances were significant and this same level of H&C considerations do not exist for the OP's situation. Apples and oranges.