Heath Novosad: Terrifying John Does by sending ISP Subpoenas in Ansys Software Lawsuits.

Last Updated on February 3, 2026 by Rob Cashman

Ansys, Inc. brings mass “John Doe” software piracy lawsuits in the Western District of Texas (including 6:25‑cv‑00292, 6:24‑cv‑00363, and 6:23‑cv‑00120) over unlicensed downloads, installs, and cracks of its simulation software. Lead counsel Heath A. Novosad of Daniels & Tredennick LLP enforces these cases with high‑pressure, six‑figure settlement demands and aggressive financial discovery that resemble copyright‑troll tactics. Cashman Law Firm, PLLC defends John Doe defendants in these matters, advising against wasting money on doomed motions to quash and focusing instead on realistic defense and negotiation strategies.

TL;DR – Ansys files Texas federal “John Doe” software piracy cases against people accused of using its engineering software without a license, then unmasking them through ISP subpoenas. In my experience defending these lawsuits, lead attorney Heath A. Novosad uses hostile, troll‑style tactics: inconsistent six‑figure demands, intrusive asset digging, and aggressive negotiations. Defendants should not reflexively file a motion to quash but instead understand their options and get targeted advice before responding to any subpoena or demand letter.

What are Ansys software piracy lawsuits and how does Heath Novosad enforce them?

Ansys software piracy lawsuits are Texas federal copyright infringement cases against anonymous “John Doe” defendants accused of downloading, cracking, or over‑installing Ansys software without a license, with ISP subpoenas used to reveal subscriber identities. Led by attorney Heath A. Novosad of Daniels & Tredennick LLP, these cases are enforced through aggressive, often inconsistent six‑figure settlement demands and intrusive financial inquiries that, in my view, go beyond simple deterrence. Defendants who receive an Ansys ISP subpoena or notice should avoid knee‑jerk motions to quash and instead consult experienced counsel to choose among litigation, settlement, or other strategic responses.

Heath Novosad represents Ansys, Inc. in their Copyright Infringement Cases

Heath A. Novosad, a “seasoned attorney with over 20 years of experience in civil litigation,” is at the forefront of Ansys, Inc.’s legal efforts to protect its intellectual property. As a partner at Daniels & Tredennick LLP, Novosad has represented Ansys, Inc. in multiple high-profile copyright infringement lawsuits, including the most recent Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1 Through 323 (Case No. 6:25-cv-00292).

If you are a defendant in the most recent Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1-323 lawsuit filed in the Western District of Texas, keep reading. There is a reason I am going through these details.

And, just so there is no confusion, I am not Heath A. Novosad, nor do I work for Ansys, Inc.

In this article, I hope to share my experiences as an attorney when I represented our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC‘s clients in his previous Ansys Inc. v. Does lawsuit. You simply need to know what tactics you will be dealing with when defending against an Ansys, Inc. lawsuit.

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > >

Background on Heath A. Novosad

Heath Novosad’s legal career (from his LinkedIn Profile) spans various areas, including commercial disputes, business torts, patent infringement lawsuits, and insurance litigation. He has represented clients across multiple industries such as technology, energy, financial services, and telecommunications.

Current Position: Partner at Daniels & Tredennick LLP
Previous Position: Partner at Bracewell LLP
Education: BBA, Business Honors and Marketing from The University of Texas at Austin; Juris Doctor from The University of Texas School of Law in 2002.

Ansys, Inc. and Its Legal Actions

Ansys, Inc. is a leading developer of engineering simulation software, widely used in various industries for product design and testing. Seemingly, to protect its software from unauthorized use, Ansys has filed several lawsuits against anonymous defendants, more commonly referred to as a “John Doe” Defendant.  Each lawsuit claims that their Ansys software was used without a license.

Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1 Through 323 (Case No. 6:25-cv-00292): Filed on July 10, 2025, in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas, this case involves 323 anonymous defendants. Novosad is still the attorney representing Ansys in this matter.

Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1 Through 359 (Case No. 6:24-cv-00363): This case targets 359 anonymous defendants accused of copyright infringement. Heath Novosad will no doubt be leading the legal charge for Ansys in this lawsuit.

Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1 Through 213 (Case No. 6:23-cv-00120): Filed on February 15, 2023, in the US District Court for the Western District of Texas, this case involves 213 anonymous defendants. Novosad was the attorney representing Ansys in this matter.

If you were implicated in one of their lawsuits and you are looking for some direction, click here for a Walkthrough of the Ansys software lawsuits.

Other Attorneys Involved in Ansys Software Lawsuits

In addition to Heath Novosad, several other attorneys are also representing Ansys, Inc. in these lawsuits:

John Luman: A partner at Daniels & Tredennick LLP, Luman brings extensive experience in high-stakes litigation, focusing on patent and copyright cases. John Luman is referred to on the docket as “John Francis Luman, III.”

In Ansys’ previous lawsuit, speaking to Health Novosad, it appeared to me as if John Luman was one of the ‘higher-ups’ in the law firm, but he was not involved much in the day-to-day activities of the lawsuit.

Mary Rodman Crawford: A younger attorney at Daniels & Tredennick LLP.

Having dealt with Heath in the past, I am not sure how much she will be involved in the ‘frontlines’ of their cases.

High-Pressure Settlement Tactics

Ansys, Inc., under the legal guidance of Heath Novosad and his colleagues, appeared to me to employ high-pressure settlement tactics to resolve their client’s copyright infringement claims. As an attorney, I spoke to Heath on a number of occasions (and we exchanged more e-mails than I was happy to exchange), I felt like his tactics were more akin to those used by “copyright trolls,” who aggressively pursue settlements to avoid prolonged litigation.

As owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC in Houston, TX, as a New York and Texas-licensed attorney for almost 20 years, as a USPTO registered patent attorney focusing on battling against ‘patent trolls’ and their tactics, and as the author of the Torrentlawyer.com website, you likely know me from my 220+ articles, and that I am no stranger to dealing with copyright trolls.

My experiences with Heath A. Novosad in his previous Ansys, Inc. lawsuit were nothing less than confrontational. On a number of occasions, they were even loud and hostile. A typical copyright troll wants to quickly settle for a certain amount, and then move on to the next defendant. Not Ansys.

Heath Novosad, as the attorney for Ansys, Inc., tried to lure me in with one set of settlement numbers, and then with a ‘bait-and-switch’, he confronted me with another set of settlement numbers which were significantly higher.

“For his boss,” (I assumed John Lumin), he sent me settlement demand letters containing one set of numbers which were hundreds of thousands of dollars for the unlawful use of one of his client’s copyrighted software titles, but then he told me not to pay attention to his settlement demand letters.

Instead of trying to get the settlement numbers he demanded in his settlement demand letters, Heath Novosad tried to employ a “show me all of your client’s tax records, financial histories, and every asset they have,” and maybe I’ll ask for double or triple that number. This is what he told me his strategy was.

In short, their settlement offer was not “we want $30,000 per license or ‘seat’ of our client’s software,” (which I would understand and respect, especially if they believed their software was worth that much, or was being sold on their online store for $30,000 per license or seat). Instead, their settlement offers were haphazard, as if they were making up on-the-spot how much to ask for in a settlement.

In other words, there was ABSOLUTELY NO CONSISTENCY between one settlement asking price and the next.

And, just in case you were wondering — and I do not know if this is a good thing or not — NONE of my clients settled.

What is the similarity between Ansys and Siemens lawsuits?

Ansys Lawsuits bear ABSOLUTELY NO RESEMBLANCE to what I have written about the Siemens cases (except they both are ‘software piracy’ lawsuits, where the copyright holder is filing a copyright infringement lawsuit in a federal court to protect their client’s copyright rights).

I have represented hundreds (maybe thousands, maybe tens of thousands) of clients in the various copyright ‘troll’ lawsuits filed in federal courts since 2010. I have represented clients in every one of the Siemens Industry Software Inc. lawsuits, and in my opinion, while I have had a number of clients settle with Siemens AND be happy with the settlement and software purchase or software license they purchased as a condition of their settlement agreement.

If you asked me about the ‘hostility level’ in Ansys cases compared to the Siemens cases, I would tell you that the hostility level of the Ansys cases is notably high. The reason is because Ansys attorney Heath A. Novosad employs high pressure techniques to inquire about the assets of defendants to determine what settlement amounts her will decide to offer, rather than proposing specific figures.

If you would like more insights into similar cases and how our law firm has handled them, you can refer to my articles on the Siemens Industry Software lawsuits.

Yes, the Siemens Software Lawsuits share similarities with the Ansys cases because they are both software piracy lawsuits. But, they differ significantly in:

• WHAT the copyright holder is LOOKING TO RECEIVE FROM YOU,
  
• WHAT they are willing to ACCEPT (MONEY? SOFTWARE PURCHASE? SOFTWARE LICENSE?), and
  
• The HOSTILITY LEVELS of the plaintiff’s attorney (here, Heath Novosad).

In contrast to what I’ve observed with the Ansys lawsuits, the Siemens cases appear to aim for deterrence rather than punishment. Ansys lawsuits seem focused on making their settlement offers punitive and punishing. You can read more about my comparison between Siemens and Ansys cases here.

Let’s hope another attorney represents Ansys Inc. negotiations in this coming lawsuit. Perhaps Heath should hand the reigns to Mary Rodman Crawford (another Ansys, Inc. attorney) and let her handle the settlement negotiations moving forward.

The Ansys Lawsuit: Defending Against Software-Based Copyright Infringement Claims

Again, my name is Rob Cashman, and I am the owner of the Cashman Law Firm, PLLC. (If you have not figured this out yet) our law firm has a history of representing John Doe defendants in Ansys, Inc. and hundreds of other copyright infringement cases.

Our Texas-based defense law firm specializes in copyright infringement defense and unlicensed software audits, mass copyright and mass software defense tactics, business software dispute and licensing negotiations between software companies, large software publishers, and those who made unlicensed use of copyrighted software code and software products under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. 

There is no such thing as a “software defense lawyer” or a “software defense law firm.”  Where the area of software disputes are concerned, most cases involve civil copyright infringement claims against internet users.  In this narrow area of law, our law firm has done quite a bit of work in software defense cases (which are copyright cases), and our niche area of copyright law is helping defendants navigate the complexities of federal copyright litigation as they apply to unlicensed use of software, movies, and music downloaded or copied using the internet.

What is the Ansys Lawsuit About?

To me, Ansys, Inc. Lawsuits look like any other copyright lawsuit filed in a federal court. And Ansys, Inc. appears to want what any copyright holder would want — a settlement payment that is more anyone can afford. Wouldn’t it be nice if they were actually looking to turn their accused defendants into loyal customers instead of trying to penalize them and maximize their own financial return?!

Generally, Ansys Lawsuits ‘quack’ the same way any other copyright infringement duck would ‘quack’.  Ansys copyrights their software (as any software company should).  When internet users:

• purchase software than then over-install software [meaning, they install multiple copies onto different computers when they only purchased one ‘seat’ or one license];
  
• download Ansys software from a pirate site;
  
• crack it or apply someone else’s crack using a license key or hardware device

…In each of these circumstances, that unlicensed Ansys software user is then added to an ever growing list of defendants who will be sued in federal court, and then they sue them for copyright infringement.

The lawsuits Ansys files to protect its legal rights do not claim any criminal copyright infringement.  Rather, their lawsuits are CIVIL lawsuits, meaning that they are trying to get copyright infringement statutory damages of $150,000 per instance of infringement from each so-called software pirate, or better — they are looking for a hefty software settlement payment.

What are software-based John Doe lawsuits?

Ansys, Inc. lawsuits are copyright infringement lawsuits based on the unlawful acquisition, downloading, copying, cracking, installing, or making use of their software without a license. Software-based John Doe lawsuits are merely copyright infringement lawsuits against unknown John Doe Defendants, where the infringement is against a copyright holder’s copyrighted software, and where the software copyright holder does not know the identity of the accused infringer.

Defending these lawsuits are no different from any other federal copyright action.  Ansys does not know the identity of those who used their software without a license, so they ask the court to allow them to issue a subpoena to the ISP, forcing it to disclose the name and address of the account holder who was assigned a particular IP address when the alleged infringement occurred. 

The ISP would then forward a copy of the Ansys ISP subpoena to the account holder, and the ISP would then tell the account holder that he could file a motion to quash the subpoena.  Mounting an Ansys software defense strategy is just another way of doing what any copyright infringement defense law firm would do when a known copyright troll once again filed another mass copyright infringement lawsuit.  

What are the 4 Options of an Accused John Doe Defendant in an Ansys, Inc. Case?

An accused John Doe Defendant has the same four options that they do with any copyright infringement lawsuit:

1. File a Motion to Quash the ISP Subpoena: This is not an option for the reasons I outlined elsewhere.
   
2. Litigation: Fight the claims in litigation, claiming that you did not do the downloading of their software, and that any use you made of it was legal, lawful, and licensed.
   
3. Settlement: Negotiate a settlement payment in return for a release of liability.
   
4. Do NOTHING: This sounds the most enticing, especially considering the aggressive tactics that Ansys employs to enforce its copyrights. However, if you do nothing, Ansys could name and serve you as a defendant (which means you are on the litigation path, whether you like it or not).

Let’s delve into these a bit deeper (keep reading):

Why filing a Motion to Quash in response to receiving an ISP Subpoena Notification Letter is a TRAP.

If you receive a letter from your ISP indicating that you are implicated in an Ansys, Inc. lawsuit, it is crucial to understand your options. The Comcast ISP subpoena letter that you received in the mail will make you think that you need to file a Motion to Quash (or an “opposition with the court”) to prevent your ISP from disclosing your identity.

THIS IS A TRAP, and without spending any more of your valuable time, you can read my article on Why Filing a Motion to Quash will Fail. I have been saying for years that Comcast should change their ISP subpoena notification letters, but the wording remains unchanged.

Ansys ISP Notification Letters

Next, once you convince yourself that you will not file a motion to quash, then you should review my article on ISP Subpoena Notification Letters. There are things here you MUST know about:

• WHO-IS-WHO? (and what your status is to: 1) the ISP, 2) the federal court, and 3) to the plaintiff’s attorney);
  
• WHAT DID YOU DO? – Whether you are accused of downloading a copyrighted movie, or here, a copyrighted piece of software and what the intentions of the copyright holder are in filing the lawsuit;
  
• HAVE YOU ALREADY BEEN NAMED AND SERVED AS A DEFENDANT? If you have already been named and served, you need to find guidance on that process in my article on Named and Served Defendants.

Why I found Ansys Lawsuits to be distasteful (and why I have not written articles on these).

If you have not figured this out already, there is a REASON why I have not written about Ansys, Inc. cases like so many of the ‘me too’ attorneys (who are merely just trying to get you as a customer so that they could be ‘surprised by the horrible experiences’ and charge you more money).

My experience of representing clients in their previous Ansys, Inc. case was simply distasteful. I did not find that I could trust the words of their attorney, and I did not find the interactions with their attorney to be cordial or professional.

What is your strategy in representing clients against Ansys, Inc.?

My strategy is simple.  Don’t waste time doing legal things when the client would get the same outcome if I didn’t do them.  Don’t generate reasons to bill additional legal fees, and be real both with the plaintiff’s attorneys AND with my own clients. 

Most of the time, companies like Ansys ask for more money than their John Doe Defendants actually have.  So as an attorney, make use of that. It only makes sense to open the lines of communication, negotiate honestly, and do your best to come to an amicable arrangement. Yes, I can help you do this, but no, I don’t like the Ansys lawsuits or their scare tactics at all.

If you have any questions about Ansys, Inc. cases, the strategies of the plaintiffs, or the high-pressure settlement tactics employed by Heath Novosad, or if you want my legal opinion of what you should do if you are implicated as a John Doe in the most recent Ansys, Inc. v. Does 1 through 359 (Case No. 6:24-cv-00363) lawsuit, you can call me, or e-mail me [Rob Cashman] at info@cashmanlawfirm.com.

FAQs

Conclusion

Heath A. Novosad’s expertise and aggressive legal strategies have made him a key figure in Ansys, Inc.’s efforts to monetize its software copyrights. While Novosad continues to lead significant legal battles for Ansys, Inc. alongside his colleagues John Luman (John Francis Luman III), and most recently, Mary Rodman Crawford, I have seen firsthand how these attorneys handle their Ansys, Inc. lawsuits when I defended accused defendants in their previous lawsuit.

My opinion is that the Ansys, Inc. cases are nothing more than a high-pressure, hostile settlement extortion scheme.

If you are implicated in an Ansys, Inc. lawsuit and need legal advice, consider reaching out to me (Rob Cashman) or our Cashman Law Firm, PLLC for guidance and support. I’ll give you my honest thoughts, even if they turn you away from me or our law firm.

Have you read enough? Book Now to get help. > >

ADDITIONAL RESOURCES

FOR MORE INFORMATION: If you have been implicated as a John Doe defendant in a lawsuit, the walkthrough articles (below) are the first and only articles that you should read before deciding what to do:

• Ansys Software Lawsuit Walkthrough: What to Do If You Received an ISP Subpoena or John Doe Notice
  
  
• The “Tinkerer” Defense in Ansys Software Lawsuits: Not Every Download Is Commercial Piracy
  
  
• Should You Settle an Ansys Software Lawsuit? What Accused Defendants Need to Know
  
  
• Ansys Software Lawsuits vs. Siemens Software Lawsuits: Why Defendants Should Not Assume the Same Strategy

FOR IMMEDIATE CONTACT WITH AN ATTORNEY: To set up a free consultation to speak to an attorney about your lawsuit, click here.  Lastly, please feel free to e-mail me at info[at] cashmanlawfirm.com, or call 713-364-3476 to speak to me now about your case (I do prefer you read the articles first), or to get your questions answered.

CONTACT FORM: If you have a question or comment about what I have written, and you want to keep it *for my eyes only*, please feel free to use the form below. The information you post will be e-mailed to me, and I will be happy to respond.

NOTE: No attorney client relationship is established by sending this form, and while the attorney-client privilege (which keeps everything that you share confidential and private) attaches immediately when you contact me, I do not become your attorney until we sign a contract together.  That being said, please do not state anything incriminating about your case when using this form, or more practically, in any e-mail.

945 McKinney Street, Suite 16163, Houston, TX 77002
Tel: 713-364-3476
info [at] cashmanlawfirm.com

© 2010-2026 by Cashman Law Firm, PLLC.
All Rights Reserved.