COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2018

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]

NOTE 10 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Operating leases

The Company’s principal executive offices are located at 5210 E. Williams Circle, Suite 750, Tucson, Arizona 85711, consisting of approximately 5,151 square feet as of December 31, 2018. The Company’s principal executive office was leased for an aggregate amount of $4,724 per month through September 1, 2016, $5,474 through September 30, 2017 and an aggregate amount of $6,224 per month as of December 31, 2017. On December 21, 2017, effective February 1, 2018, the Company amended its existing lease to expand its Arizona office to approximately 4,248 square feet that expires September 30, 2021. As such, beginning February 1, 2018, the basic rent increased to $9,598 on February 1, 2018. On October 2, 2018, effective December 1, 2018, the Company amended further its existing lease to expand its Arizona office to approximately 5,151 square feet. In accordance with the amended lease, rent increases to $11,810 on January 1, 2019, escalating to $12,977 at the end of the lease, which was extended to October 31, 2022.

The Company also has offices in Atlanta, previously located at 1855 Piedmont Road, Suite 200, Marietta, Georgia leased for an aggregate of $2,763 per month. Beginning September 1, 2016, we re-located offices located at 3901 Roswell Road, Suite 134, leased for an aggregate of $3,937 per month as of December 31, 2017 and expiring September 30, 2019. On December 29, 2017, effective February 1, 2018, amended its existing lease to expand its Georgia office to approximately 3,831 square feet. As such, beginning February 1, 2018, the basic rent increases by $1,500 on February 1, 2018 through remainder of lease term. Subsequent to year end, in February 2019, the Company entered into a lease for new offices in Marietta, Georgia located at 450 Franklin Gateway, Marietta, Georgia consisting of approximately 9,662 square feet. The new lease will commence, depending on substantial completion of the landlord’s development but no later than June 1, 2019.

In 2018 and 2017, we leased office space in New York on a month to month basis for $300 per month.

Beginning November 1, 2015, we subleased an office from a company controlled by our Executive Chairman in Scottsdale, AZ for $3,578 per month as of December 31, 2018.

Rent expense charged to operations, which differs from rent paid due to rent credits and to increasing amounts of base rent, is calculated by allocating total rental payments on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. During the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, rent expense was $220,407 and $144,030, respectively and as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, net deferred rent payable was $11,057 and $14,450, respectively.

The following is a schedule of future minimum lease payments for all non-cancelable operating leases for each of the next four years ending December 31 and thereafter:

Year ended December 31,
2019		195,454
2020		147,079
2021		150,386
2022		142,242
Total	$	635,161

Litigation

On January 23, 2017, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement pursuant to the terms set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement, provisionally certified a settlement class of shareholders, and directed plaintiffs' counsel to provide notice to that class. The Court held a Settlement Hearing May 8, 2017 to consider any objections to the Settlement that might be raised by settlement class members, to consider plaintiffs’ counsel's application for an award of fees and costs, and to determine whether the Order and Final Judgment as provided under the Stipulation of Settlement should be entered, dismissing the case with prejudice. On May 8, 2017, this Court granted final approval to the settlement of the securities class action brought by Lead Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. On February 9, 2018, the Court authorized distribution of the Net Settlement Fund and approved the proposed modified plan of allocation.

On May 16, 2016, a shareholder derivative complaint entitled LiPoChing, Derivatively and on Behalf of AudioEye, Inc., v. Bradley, et al., was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. As a derivative complaint, the plaintiff-shareholder purported to act on behalf of the Company against the Named Individuals. The Company was named as a nominal defendant. The complaint asserted causes of action including breach of fiduciary duty and others, arising from the Company’s restatement of its financial results for the first three quarters of 2014. The complaint sought, among other relief, compensatory damages, restitution and attorneys’ fees. In October 2016, the Company and Named Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. In response, the Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the complaint without prejudice. Plaintiff’s counsel subsequently submitted a demand to the Company’s Board of Directors, to investigate the circumstances surrounding restatement of its financial results for the first three quarters of 2014. On June 22, 2018, the matter was resolved to the parties’ satisfaction. The resolution of the matter did not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

On July 26, 2016, a shareholder derivative complaint entitled Denese M. Hebert, derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant AudioEye, Inc., v. Bradley, et al., was filed in the State of Arizona Superior Court for Pima County. The complaint generally asserted causes of action related to the Company’s restatement of its financial statements for the first three fiscal quarters of 2014. As a derivative complaint, the plaintiff-shareholder purported to act on behalf of the Company against the Named Individuals. The Company was named as a nominal defendant. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which the Court granted on May 8, 2017, while also denying Plaintiff’s request for leave to amend the complaint. As in the above matter, after this matter was dismissed Plaintiff’s counsel subsequently submitted a demand to the Company’s Board of Directors, to investigate the circumstances surrounding restatement of its financial results for the first three quarters of 2014. On June 22, 2018, the matter was resolved to the parties’ satisfaction. The resolution of the matter did not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

We may become involved in various other routine disputes and allegations incidental to our business operations. While it is not possible to determine the ultimate disposition of these matters, our management believes that the resolution of any such matters, should they arise, is not likely to have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.