NEWARK, NJ – A New Jersey federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit filed by a longtime professor at the New Jersey Institute of Technology who claimed the university copied and commercialized his graduate-level machine learning course without his permission during his medical leave.
Dr. Usman Roshan, a data science professor employed at NJIT since 2004, filed suit earlier this year alleging copyright infringement and retaliation after he discovered what he believed was unauthorized use of his course, CS 675, which he developed in 2013. Roshan asserted that the school repackaged his content as an online offering while he was on family medical leave between 2021 and 2023 — and later barred him from teaching it.
But in a ruling filed Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti granted NJIT’s motion to dismiss the complaint, finding Roshan failed to state a valid legal claim under federal copyright law or constitutional protections. The court noted that while Roshan had registered the course materials with the U.S. Copyright Office, his legal arguments did not establish that NJIT had violated any enforceable rights.
Roshan’s complaint centered around an online version of DS 675, a course he claimed was “almost identical” to the one he created, allegedly produced by NJIT and offered to a broader online audience without his consent. He said he discovered its existence while recovering from surgery and accused administrators of copying his work to develop the new course under university control.
In his complaint, Roshan referenced an internal email from 2020 in which NJIT officials appeared to acknowledge that faculty hold copyrights over their courses, but no administrative action followed. When he later asked to teach the online section of the course, NJIT denied the request, citing internal faculty assignments.
However, the court ruled that NJIT’s copyright policy — which allows the university to retain rights to course materials developed with institutional resources or in connection with official programs — applied to the dispute. Additionally, Judge Martinotti determined that Roshan had not presented enough facts to show that the alleged actions by NJIT met the legal threshold for copyright infringement or retaliation.
The judge also dismissed any constitutional claims Roshan raised, noting he failed to establish that his rights had been violated under federal law. The court declined to hold oral arguments, finding the legal issues clear based on the written submissions.
Although the ruling ends Roshan’s case in district court, it remains unclear whether he will appeal the decision to a higher court.
