Skip to main content
Joshua L. Raskin

Joshua L. Raskin

Shareholder
New York D +1 212.801.6930 T +1 212.801.9200

Joshua L. Raskin is Vice Chair of the firm’s Patent Litigation Group and Chair of the New York Intellectual Property & Technology Group. Listed by Patexia as the 31st best performing patent litigation attorney representing defendants in 2023 (out of 16,585 attorneys), Josh’s primary focus is on patent litigation, although he has wide-ranging experience in all areas of IP. He has litigated countless cases in federal courts across the country and has argued numerous times before the Courts of Appeals for the Federal and Second Circuits. He has represented clients at the trial and appellate stages in a broad range of industries, including electronics, computer technology, mobile handsets, medical devices and products, and finance.

His experience is broad and varied having represented both defendants and plaintiffs. Prior to joining the firm, Josh was the head of the patent litigation practice at a prominent New York plaintiffs’ firm where he oversaw numerous complex patent cases. Before that, Josh was a partner and co-head of the patent litigation practice at a national firm where he represented both plaintiffs and defendants in cases involving all areas of intellectual property, including patents, trademarks and copyrights.

Josh also has deep experience with inter partes review proceedings, including representing companies such as eBay, Rakuten, Chewy, Samsung, B. Braun Medical, and Stingray Digital Group. Outside of the new post-grant review processes, Josh has also worked on numerous U.S. patent reexaminations (both inter partes and ex parte).

Concentrations

  • Patent infringement
  • Post-issuance patent proceedings, including inter partes review, post-grant review and ex parte reexaminations
  • Intellectual property counseling, licensing, due diligence and opinions
  • Trademark infringement

Competenze

Proprietà Intellettuale & Information Technology Intellectual Property Litigation Retail

Esperienze Professionali - Attività Accademiche


  • Chewy, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corporation, 1-21-CV-01319 (S.D.N.Y. 2021). Lead counsel in a declaratory judgment action against IBM relating to web and mobile technologies. Succeeded in obtaining a complete victory for client Chewy, including judgments of non-infringement on three patents and judgments of invalidity on two other patents following a successful motion for summary judgment which was affirmed on appeal.
  • International Business Machines Corporation v. Rakuten, Inc., et al., 1-21-CV-00461 (D. Del.). Lead counsel in this patent litigation for client Rakuten relating to five patents purporting to cover web and mobile technologies.
  • Pop Top Corp. v. Rakuten Kobo Inc., 20-cv-04482-DMR (N.D. Cal. 2021). Lead counsel in this patent infringement case for client Rakuten Kobo in the District Court for the Northern District of California relating to a method of highlighting internet documents. Succeeded in obtaining a judgment of non-infringement, affirmed on appeal, following a successful motion for summary judgment as well as an award of attorneys’ fees following a successful motion for sanctions under Section 285.
  • Lexos Media IP, LLC v. eBay Inc., 23-cv-06314-RFL (N.D. Cal.). Lead counsel in this patent infringement case for client eBay relating to three patents purporting to cover web technologies.
  • Walker v.eBay et al., 23-cv-4409-JPC-JW (S.D.N.Y. 2023). Lead counsel in this design patent infringement case for client eBay relating to a patent purporting to cover the ornamental design of a genie lamp. Succeeded in obtaining a dismissal for non-infringement at the 12(b)(6) stage of the case.
  • Satco Products, Inc. v. Signify North America Corporation, et al.: Represented Satco in a patent infringement action filed against Signify North America Corp. and Signify Holding B.V. in the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleging infringement of three patents directed to light bulbs containing LED filament and Gimbal LED recessed lights.
  • Satco Products, Inc. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd., et al.: Represented Satco in a patent infringement action filed against Seoul Semiconductor Inc. and Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
  • Uniloc USA, Inc., et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., et al., 18-cv-00508 (E.D. Tex.). Represented Samsung in a patent infringement case alleging infringement of a patent concerning mobile phone lock screen functionality.
  • Sinostar Global Ltd. v. Rakuten Kobo, Inc., 20-CV-00096 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to electronic book hardware technology.
  • Signify North America Corporation et al v. Satco Products, Inc., 19-CV-06125 (E.D.N.Y). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to light emitting diode (LED) technology.
  • Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. v. Satco Products, Inc., 19-CV-06719 (E.D.N.Y.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to light emitting diode (LED) technology.
  • SV.EL. Societa Italiana Per Lo Sviluppo Delleletrronica S.P.A. v. Rakuten Kobo, Inc., 18-CV-00068 (D. Del.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to electronic book software technology.
  • Uniloc USA, Inc. et al. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al., 18-CV-00042 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to mobile phone technologies.
  • Product Association Technologies LLC v. ShopStyle, Inc., 17-CV-00978 (D. Del.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to Internet database technology.
  • Braun Melsungen AG, et al. v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al., 16-CV-00411 (D. Del.). Led this patent litigation involving infringement of patents relating to IV catheter safety systems.
  • Garmin Switzerland GMBH and Garmin Corporation v. Navico, Inc., 16-CV-2706 (D. Kan.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to marine route navigation technology.
  • American Needle, Inc. v. CafePress Inc., 15-CV-03968 (N.D. Ill.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to graphical user interface technology.
  • FlatWorld Interactives LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd, et al., 12-CV-00804 (D. Del.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to software for removing images from a touch screen.
  • E. Technology v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., 12-CV-02825 (W.D. Tenn.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to technology for storing user profiles and user libraries of files on servers and accessing them on a client device.
  • Digital Audio Encoding Systems, LLC v. eBay Inc., 16-CV-00491 (D. Del.); Digital Audio Encoding Systems, LLC v. LG Electronics, Inc., 16-CV-00562 (D. Del.). Led the defense of these patent litigations relating to the encoding of signals based on a property of the receiving device.
  • Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., 14-CV-00883 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to technology for two-way wireless communications, including methods and devices for processing data messages between a mobile unit and a network operations center, and delivery notification technology.
  • Guyzar LLC v. Ebates, Inc., 15-CV-02000 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to Internet third party login technologies.
  • Blue Spike, LLC v. 3M Cogent, Inc., 12-CV-499 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to digital watermarking technology.
  • Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC, 13-CV-00259 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to technology for two-way wireless communications, including methods and devices for processing data messages between a mobile unit and a network operations center.
  • Cellport Systems, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., 13-CV-00180 (D. Colo.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to technology for selecting one of a plurality of communication channels over which to transmit data using a wireless device.
  • Data Speed Technology, LLC v. Blackboard Inc., 13-CV-1445 (D. Del.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to computer information storage systems.
  • Eclipse IP LLC v. CafePress, Inc., 13-CV-01711 (D. Del.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to electronic messaging, notification and authentication systems.
  • Bluebonnet Telecommunications LLC v. Samsung Electronics America Inc., et al., 12-CV-504 (E.D. Tex.). Led the defense of this patent litigation relating to mobile device features allowing a user to determine whether certain telephony features are active, deactivate certain features and silence the ringer.
  • Cinsay, Inc. v. Liveclicker, Inc., 13-cv-04126 (N.D. Tex.). Represented the defendant in a patent litigation regarding interactive text/advertisement overlays over videos.
  • Express Card Systems LLC v. CafePress Inc., 13-cv-137 (E.D. Tex.); Express Card Systems LLC v. Target Corp., 13-cv-00020 (E.D. Tex. 2013). Represented the defendants in patent litigation regarding systems for creating customized greeting cards.
  • ORG Structure Innovations, LLC v. Fischer International Identity, LLC, 12-cv-01464-SLR (D. Del. 201). Represented the defendant in patent litigation regarding computer software.
  • Anvik Corporation v. Nikon Precision, Inc., et al., 05-cv-7891 (S.D.N.Y.). Represented the plaintiff in patent litigation relating to lithography methods used to expose glass panels used in the fabrication of LCD panels.
  • Williamson, on Behalf of and as Trustee for At Home Bondholders’ Liquidating Trust v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al., 11-cv-04948 (S.D.N.Y.). Represented the plaintiff in patent litigation relating to internet protocol television systems.
  • IpLearn, LLC v. Blackboard Inc., 11-cv-00876 (D. Del.). Represented the defendant in patent litigation regarding computer-aided learning systems.
  • Xpoint Technologies, Inc. v. Intel Corporation, et al., 09-cv-0026 (D. Del.). Represented the plaintiff in patent litigation relating to computer backup and restore technology.
  • Xpoint Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corporation, et al., 09-CV-0628 (D. Del.). Represented the plaintiff in patent litigation relating to Peer I/O technology.
  • IGT v. Las Vegas Gaming, Inc., 07-cv-00415 (D. Nev.). Represented the defendant in a complex copyright/trademark infringement case concerning audiovisual display of electronic gaming machines.
  • Regal Electronics Inc. v. Bel Fuse, Inc., et al., 03-cv-01296 (N.D. Cal.). Represented the defendant in a patent litigation regarding high speed data connectors.
  • Blazer v. eBay, Inc., 1:15-cv-01059 (N.D. Ala.). Represented eBay in a patent litigation relating to wooden carpenter bee traps.
  • USB Technologies, LLC v. eBay Inc., et al., 2:15-cv-04836 (C.D. Cal.). Represented eBay in patent litigation regarding lighting to USB flash drive products.
  • Carson Optical, Inc. v. eBay Inc., 2:2015-cv-03793 (E.D.N.Y. 205). Representing eBay in patent litigation regarding head magnifying glasses and head belts for head magnifying glasses.
  • Braun Melsungen AG, et al. v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al., 1:16-cv-00411 (D. Del.). Represented B. Braun in a litigation involving infringement by Becton, Dickinson and Company of 10 patents generally relating to IV catheter safety systems.
  • CAO Group, Inc. v. Biolase Technology, Inc., 12-CV-0038 (D. Utah). Represented Biolase in patent litigation regarding laser-driven medical devices.
  • Laclede Professional Products Inc. v. Sultan Dental Products, Ltd., 98-cv-981 (C.D. Cal.). Represented the defendant in a patent infringement case involving dental fluoride foams.
  • CryptoPeak Solutions, LLC v. 3M Company; CryptoPeak Solutions, LLC v. Charles Schwab & Co, Inc.; CryptoPeak Solutions, LLC v. optionsXpress, Inc., 15-cv-1284 (E.D. Tex. 2015). Represented 3M Company, Charles Schwab and optionsXpress in connection with a patent suit initiated by CryptoPeak Solutions, LLC in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Schroeder. The asserted patent generally relates to securely generating public and private encryption keys in a verifiable manner. Settled with plaintiff on terms very favorable to clients.
  • Ruby Sands LLC v. Charles Schwab Corp.; Ruby Sands LLC v. Fidelity Investments, 15-cv-01985 (E.D. Tex.). Represented Charles Schwab and Fidelity in litigations in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Gilstrap. The asserted patent related to the capture and transfer of images from one image transfer device to another.  Settled with plaintiff on terms very favorable to clients.
  • EMG Technology, LLC v. The Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company, 14-cv-00094-MHS (E.D. Tex.). Represented Northwestern Mutual in litigation in the Eastern District of Texas before Judge Schneider. The asserted patent related to a system for navigating the Internet that converts standard HTML website pages to a “sister site” that enables the HTML website content to be navigated using a “simplified navigation system.” GT was successful in getting plaintiff to dismiss the case with prejudice.
  • Leveraged Innovations, LLC. v. NASDAQ OMX Group, Inc., et al., 11-cv-3203 (S.D.N.Y.). Represented the plaintiff in patent litigation in the Southern District of New York relating to computer systems for creating and exchanging of shares of leveraged exchange-traded funds.
  • Stingray Digital Group Inc. et al v. Music Choice (IPR2018-00114, 2017-01450, 2017-01193, 2017-01192, IPR2017-01191, IPR2017-00888). Represented petitioner in IPR proceedings related to patents covering digital music technologies.
  • Becton Dickinson and Company v. B. Braun Melsungen AG (IPR2017-01587). Represented patent owner in IPR proceedings related to patents covering IV catheter safety systems.
  • Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. B.E. Technology, LLC (IPR2014-00044). Represented petitioner in IPR proceedings related to patents related to storing user profiles and user libraries of files on servers and accessing them on a client device.

°Certain of the above representations were handled by Mr. Raskin prior to his joining Greenberg Traurig, LLP.

Riconoscimenti e Premi

  • Listed, Patexia, "#31 Best Performing Patent Litigation Attorney Representing Defendants," 2023
  • Listed, Patexia, "#42 Most Active Patent Litigation Attorney," 2022
  • Listed, The Legal 500 United States, Intellectual Property - Patents: Litigation (full coverage), 2022-2024
    • "Recommended Lawyer," 2023-2024
  • Listed, Managing IP Magazine's World IP Handbook and Survey, "IP Stars: New York Patent Stars," 2014-2024
  • Listed, IAM magazine, "IAM Patent 1000," Litigation, 2014-2024
  • Listed, Super Lawyers magazine, New York Metro Super Lawyers, 2019-2024
  • Team Member, a U.S. News - Best Lawyers "Law Firm of the Year" in Trademark Law, 2020, 2022
  • Member, Intellectual Property Owners Association
    • U.S. Patent Law Committee, 2020-2021
    • Patent Litigation Committee, 2020-2021
    • Next Generation Leaders Committee, 2020-2021

Formazione

Formazione
  • Laurea magistrale in Giurisprudenza, Brooklyn Law School
  • B.S.E., Industrial Engineering, University of Michigan
Abilitazioni
  • New York
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas
  • U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

News, Pubblicazioni, Convegni

{{featureditem.Date}} {{featureditem.Type}}
{{featureditem.EntityTitle}} {{featureditem.ReadTime}}
{{newsItem.Date}} {{newsItem.Type}}
{{newsItem.EntityTitle}} {{newsItem.ReadTime}}
{{insightItem.Date}} {{insightItem.Type}}
{{insightItem.EntityTitle}} {{insightItem.ReadTime}}
{{eventItem.Date}} {{eventItem.Type}}
{{eventItem.EntityTitle}}
{{eventItem.Date}} {{eventItem.Type}}
{{eventItem.EntityTitle}}

Related Capabilities

Proprietà Intellettuale & Information Technology Intellectual Property Litigation Copyright Registration & Licensing Trademark & Brand Management Retail