Aasheesh Shravah

Counsel

P 212.216.1132    F 212.216.8001
1350 Broadway
New York, NY 10018

 
P 212.216.1132    F 212.216.8001   ashravah@tarterkrinsky.com

Aasheesh Shravah is counsel in the Intellectual Property practice. He has more than 15 years of experience in helping clients with domestic and international patent and trademark protection, product clearance, licensing and litigation.

Understanding that IP is critical to business success, he reviews and analyzes products to determine potential patent protection and provides critical guidance on how to modify products to avoid IP infringement. His work includes patent and trademark prosecution, patentability and clearance searches, patent design-around guidance, freedom to operate opinions and drafting and negotiating licensing agreements. Aasheesh has worked on matters involving products in diverse technologies, including medical devices, mechanical and electro-mechanical devices, power tools, hand tools, hardware, consumer products, exercise devices, alternative energy systems, software, e-commerce and business methods. He has litigated patent cases involving several of these technologies in federal district and appellate courts throughout the United States.

Aasheesh has developed a specialty in representing direct response marketing companies in the “As Seen on TV” industry. He works side by side with companies and factories that develop and manufacture products in China and counsels them early on to help them avoid patent and trademark infringement. He also advises domestic clients on how to protect their IP when working with factories in China and assists them in avoiding issues related to dual sourcing with factories in China.

Representative matters include:

  • Obtained summary judgment of non-infringement in a patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Greenland v. Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., No. CV 14-05867-RGK (EX), 2015 WL 12672093 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2015)).
  • Successfully had a case related to false advertising for “As Seen on TV” products transferred to the Northern District of Illinois from the Southern District of New York (Inventel Prod. LLC v. Penn LLC, No. 16-CV-1649 (AJN), 2017 WL 818471 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2017)).
  • Achieved the transfer of a patent infringement lawsuit for improper venue from the District of New Jersey to the Northern District of Illinois, and a stay of the case pending reexaminations of the patents.
  • Awarded summary judgment of non-infringement of a patent in a multi-patent infringement lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (HSU v. Thorsen Tool Co., No. CV 13-08248-RGK (EX), 2014 WL 12570922 (C.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2014)).
Education
  • Benjamin Cardozo School of Law, J.D., 2002
  • State University of New York at Stony Brook, B.S. in Engineering, 1998
Admissions
  • New York
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Languages
  • Hindi
Memberships
  • New York Intellectual Property Association
  • New York State Bar Association

What I do when not practicing law
Charitable events related to sports

Favorite sport team
San Francisco 49ers

Favorite vacation spot
Mexico

News

  • Seahawks-49ers Rivalry Leads to Victory for Charity

    What began as a rivalry and a billboard led to something much meaningful to Seattle Seahawks and San Francisco 49ers fans. It all started when a group of 49ers fans, led by Tarter Krinsky & Drogin IP Counsel Aasheesh Shravah, raised enough money to purchase a tongue-in-cheek billboard in the Seattle area. His idea has led to over $400,000 raised for both hospitals with matching contributions from the San Francisco 49ers and Seattle Seahawks organizations.

Events

  • The Top Five Intellectual Property Inquiries From Consumer Product Businesses at the ASD Market Week and SourceDirect Trade Shows

    I recently had the opportunity to speak about intellectual property (IP) issues at ASD Market Week, a twice-yearly B2B trade show featuring a wide range of retail merchandise, and SourceDirect, a wholesale trade show for global sourcing professionals such as importers, distributors, wholesale manufacturers and product development companies. Topics covered included domestic and international IP filings, clearing products to avoid IP infringement, IP litigation and indemnification for IP infringement.

  • Your State or Mine: Patent Lawsuits Can Now Only Be Brought Where Corporations Have Physical Locations

    For decades, companies have been subject to patent infringement lawsuits almost anywhere that they had sales, whether through a physical store or online. Often, based on online sales, the defendant corporation could be brought into any location where the end customer was located, even if only one product was sold in that state. Based on a new Federal Circuit decision (In re Cray Inc.), that is no longer true.

  • Federal Circuit Rules Software Patent for a User Interface is Patentable Subject Matter

    In the recent decision Trading Technologies International, Inc., v. CQG, Inc. et al., the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's ruling that a software patent on a graphical user interface was patentable subject matter, and not directed to an abstract idea under Alice.

  • Legal Alert: .SUCKS is Here: Can Your Brand Be Protected?

    With the goal of fostering public commentary, the new domain name .SUCKS was approved by ICANN. Despite objections from some in the IP community, the sunrise period for .SUCKS is now open; it runs until May 29th.

  • Legal Alert: A New System For International Design Protection

    Design patents continue to grow in importance for many industries. If your company designs tangible products or packages, there is a new, efficient way to seek international protection for design features.

  • Legal Alert: Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank's Effect on Business Method Patents

    The patent landscape has changed regarding business method patents.
    In the summer of 2014, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank which invalidated certain business method patents related to finance. The basis for the invalidation was that the patents covered an abstract idea not eligible for patent protection.

  • Beware of the Boilerplate Series: "Defend, Indemnify and Hold Harmless"

    Many agreements include an indemnification clause typically using language like this: “Party A will defend, indemnify and hold harmless all claims, losses and damages against Party B related to its use of the Technology.”

  • Beware of the Boilerplate Series: Defining Confidential Information

    In Non-Disclosure Agreements, there is often boilerplate language that includes trade secrets in the definition of “Confidential Information.” This seemingly innocuous language can lead to problems for the owner of the trade secrets.

  • Beware of the Boilerplate Series: Limitation of Liability

    Be wary of giving up your rights for "lost profits." In most jurisdictions, there are two types of "lost profits": (1) those arising from general damages (recovery of money that a party agreed to pay under a contract); and (2) those arising from consequential damages (recovery of money lost based on other business arrangements). The first is generally easier to prove, but often a party in breach can be reasonably expected to pay the second.

Education
  • Benjamin Cardozo School of Law, J.D., 2002
  • State University of New York at Stony Brook, B.S. in Engineering, 1998
Admissions
  • New York
  • U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
  • U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York
  • U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York
Languages
  • Hindi
Memberships
  • New York Intellectual Property Association
  • New York State Bar Association