Federal Court permits quia timet pleading to stand. Otsuka has sued Apotex for patent infringement, claiming that Apotex infringes several patents relating to aripiprazole (ABILIFY) based on Apotex's ongoing manufacture and export of aripiprazole tablets for consumption by patients outside of Canada and on the basis that Apotex intended to sell its aripiprazole tablets to patients in Canada. Apotex brought a motion to strike Otsuka’s statement of claim, alleging that the claim ought to be struck as a quia timet claim and was not supported by sufficient material facts. The Court dismissed Apotex’s motion. The Prothonotary held that the action was quia timet and therefore required material facts relating to Apotex having a deliberate intention to engage in infringing acts; that the infringing activity must be imminent and not speculative; and that the damages suffered by Otsuka must be substantial if not irreparable. The Court held that the claim was not speculative and the facts pleaded were stronger than those in other cases in which quia timet claims have been struck. In particular, it was sufficient to plead that: (1) a lengthy notice of allegation was served and Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) proceedings had commenced, (2) damages in excess of $50,000 would be suffered, and (3) Apotex was continuing to manufacture aripiprazole tablets, although presently for use outside of Canada.  Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd v Apotex IncOrder of Proth. Aalto dated 15 June 2017 (Court File T-200-17), appeal pending