---
title: "AudioEye: patent litigation ended in a global settlement"
language: en
canonical: https://osint.v3rta.com/dossiers/accessibe/audioeye-settlement/
as_of: 2026-10-10
---

# AudioEye: patent litigation ended in a global settlement

**Question.** What does the 2022 settlement establish about the patent disputes?

**Answer.** The parties reported a settlement and dismissals without prejudice. The retained documents do not disclose the financial terms or decide the infringement allegations.

## The global settlement

- Analysis: accessiBe and AudioEye litigated patent and related marketing claims in several US proceedings between 2020 and 2022. AudioEye’s 2022 annual filing records a global settlement announced on 24 October 2022 and says the three identified complaints were dismissed without prejudice. A joint patent-board filing describes a sealed settlement agreement. [s-d164] [s-d166] [s-d167] [s-d197] [s-d200] [s-d201] [s-d227]
  - Qualification: The reported mutual covenants not to sue and freedom-to-operate arrangement resolved disputes without a disclosed financial amount. Settlement and procedural venue rulings do not establish the merits of either side’s infringement or advertising allegations.
  - Response: accessiBe defended AudioEye’s cases, asserted counterclaims and filed its own Delaware patent action.
  - Outcome: The parties announced a global settlement; patent-board termination requests accompanied closure of the court proceedings.

## Audioeye venue

- Analysis: The Federal Circuit denied accessiBe’s December 2021 transfer petition without prejudice to seeking reconsideration below. In March 2022 the district court granted reconsideration and transferred the AudioEye case to western New York. The venue record discussed Israeli development personnel, New York servers and offices, and claimed sales-partner activity involving BigCommerce and Volusion. [s-d200] [s-d201]
  - Qualification: These are historical venue facts and party submissions, not proof of current infrastructure or adjudicated marketing liability. All substantive disputes were later reported settled.

## Audioeye context

- Analysis: AudioEye’s 2022 filing identifies Sero Capital as a shareholder with more than 10% and David Moradi as its sole member and AudioEye’s CEO and director. [s-d197]
  - Qualification: This is context for the identified counterparty at the filing date. It establishes no ownership or management link between Moradi and accessiBe.

## Sources

- [s-d164] Court record source · s-d164
- [s-d166] US Patent and Trademark Office retained record 166, US Patent and Trademark Office <https://ptacts.uspto.gov/ptacts/public-informations/petitions/1548753/download-documents?artifactId=OjdRoEXuvsOpKHXEeoHCNDubkradZJhhSEJuN3NhY-nj2-0pRz7RMAk>
- [s-d167] Other source · s-d167
- [s-d197] Company statement source · s-d197
- [s-d200] Court record source · s-d200
- [s-d201] Court record source · s-d201
- [s-d227] Media source · s-d227