Axcess Global Sciences v. Buddibox: Keto Supplement Patents Settled With Prejudice
Axcess Global Sciences, LLC asserted three US patents covering beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) ketone supplement compositions against Buddibox LLC and individual defendant Hadis Nuhanovic across more than 60 keto product SKUs. Filed in the Northern District of Georgia, the case resolved via a confidential settlement with prejudice in just 174 days.
BHB Keto Patent Portfolio Enforced Against Multi-Brand Supplement Seller
On 29 December 2023, Axcess Global Sciences, LLC filed suit in the US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia against Buddibox LLC — operating under the trade names eShop Direct, WW Supplements, and Total Vitamins — and its principal Hadis Nuhanovic. The complaint alleged infringement of three issued US patents: US11020362B2, US10292952B2, and US11241403B2, all directed to BHB ketone supplement compositions. The accused product list spanned more than 60 distinct keto supplement SKUs sold under a wide array of brand names.
The case closed on 20 June 2024, 174 days after filing, when the parties filed a joint motion to dismiss with prejudice pursuant to a settlement agreement. Critically, the parties also requested — and the court agreed to retain — jurisdiction to enforce the settlement terms, a standard mechanism that preserves the plaintiff’s ability to return to court if the defendant breaches agreed obligations such as royalty payments or ongoing use restrictions.
The 174-day resolution is notably swift for multi-patent litigation involving an individual defendant and a multi-brand operation, suggesting the breadth of the accused product list and the strength of the asserted portfolio may have accelerated settlement discussions. The financial terms, licensing scope, and any ongoing restrictions on Buddibox’s keto product sales remain confidential and cannot be determined from the public record.
Filing to Dismissed with Prejudice in 174 days
174 days — faster than the median N.D. Georgia patent case, suggesting early settlement leverage
Dismissed with prejudice: what the settlement structure means for both parties
Dismissal with prejudice bars any re-filing on the same claims
A dismissal with prejudice is a final adjudication on the merits for procedural purposes: Axcess Global Sciences cannot refile these infringement claims against Buddibox or Nuhanovic for the same accused products and the same three patents. The court’s retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement is equally significant — it converts the settlement into a court-enforceable obligation without requiring a separate breach-of-contract action.
Rule 41(a)(2) — with prejudiceAGS secures finality and retains enforcement leverage
For Axcess Global Sciences, a with-prejudice dismissal tied to a settlement typically signals that commercially meaningful terms were secured — whether a lump sum, royalty stream, or agreement to cease infringing activity. The retained court jurisdiction provision further strengthens AGS’s position: any breach by Buddibox can be remedied by motion in the same court rather than a new lawsuit, reducing friction and cost of enforcement.
Settlement — terms undisclosedBuddibox resolves exposure across 60+ accused SKUs
With more than 60 product SKUs accused across multiple brand names, Buddibox and Nuhanovic faced potentially substantial per-product damages exposure. Settlement with prejudice closes that liability window for the asserted patents and the accused products. However, any ongoing sale of BHB keto products post-settlement may still be subject to constraints negotiated in the settlement agreement, the terms of which are not publicly available.
Individual liability — Nuhanovic namedAGS portfolio signals active enforcement across the keto supplement sector
The combination of three asserted patents, an unusually large accused product list, and a swift settlement is consistent with an active licensing programme targeting BHB ketone supplement sellers. Other brands operating in the keto supplement space — particularly those selling products with BHB ketone compositions similar to those claimed in US11020362B2, US10292952B2, or US11241403B2 — should treat this outcome as a signal that AGS is actively monitoring and enforcing its portfolio.
BHB patent enforcement riskFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Axcess Global Sciences, LLC | Company | BHB ketone supplement IP licensor — holder of US11020362B2, US10292952B2 and US11241403B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Buddibox, LLC | Company | Buddibox LLC (dba eShop Direct, WW Supplements, Total Vitamins) and principal Hadis Nuhanovic — multi-brand keto supplement sellerSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Hadis Nuhanovic | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brian N. Platt | Attorney | Counsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Collin D. Hansen | Attorney | Counsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Cortney Alexander | Attorney | Counsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Kent & Risley, LLC | Law Firm | Representing Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Workman Nydegger | Law Firm | Representing Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Eleanor L. Ross | Judge | Georgia Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The joint motion language — ‘dismiss the above-captioned dispute with prejudice pursuant to a settlement agreement’ — confirms that the resolution is contractual, not adjudicated on the merits. The with-prejudice designation forecloses any future refiling on these specific claims and patents, while the retained jurisdiction provision signals that AGS negotiated performance obligations from Buddibox that it wished to protect via court mechanism. The absence of any public financial terms is typical of commercial supplement patent settlements.
US11020362B2, US10292952B2 & US11241403B2 — BHB Ketone Supplement Compositions
The three asserted patents — US11020362B2, US10292952B2, and US11241403B2 — are all directed to compositions and/or methods relating to beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) ketone supplements, a class of exogenous ketone products marketed for weight management and ketogenic diet support. The application numbers (US15/454157 filed circa 2017, US16/720211 circa 2019, and US17/198634 circa 2021) suggest a continuation or continuation-in-part family strategy, meaning AGS has incrementally extended claim coverage across successive filings as the BHB supplement market grew.
The commercial significance of this portfolio lies in its breadth: the 60+ accused product SKUs spanning dozens of brand names suggest that the asserted claims may cover core BHB formulation approaches rather than narrow product-specific implementations. For competitors in the keto supplement category — particularly those selling BHB salt blends, exogenous ketone drinks, or keto capsule products — understanding the specific claim scope of each patent in this family is essential to assessing infringement risk. The fact that AGS secured a with-prejudice settlement without going to claim construction or trial means the claims have never been publicly tested for validity or scope.
Should you run an FTO against US11020362B2, US10292952B2 and US11241403B2?
Any brand formulating, importing, or distributing BHB ketone dietary supplement products in the US market should treat this three-patent family as a material FTO risk. The AGS enforcement action targeted products across a wide spectrum of brand names and formulations — suggesting the asserted claims may be broad enough to reach standard BHB salt compositions. R&D teams developing new keto supplement SKUs, and brand managers sourcing white-label BHB products, should not assume that rebranding or minor reformulation provides clearance.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map your specific BHB formulation against the claim language of US11020362B2, US10292952B2, and US11241403B2, identify prior art that may support invalidity arguments, and surface the full AGS continuation family to reveal any pending applications that could extend claim coverage further. Given that AGS has settled without public claim construction, an independent claim-by-claim FTO analysis is the most reliable path to clearance confidence for product teams operating in this category.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11020362B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar BHB Supplement Patent Cases in Federal District Courts
Explore related BHB ketone and dietary supplement patent infringement cases litigated in US federal district courts, including N.D. Georgia and comparable venues.
What this case signals for the keto supplement IP landscape
AGS’s rapid settlement across 60+ SKUs and three patents suggests a disciplined enforcement strategy that other BHB supplement sellers should take seriously.
Three-patent assertion amplifies settlement pressure on multi-SKU sellers
Asserting three overlapping BHB composition patents against a defendant with 60+ accused SKUs creates compounding damages exposure that is difficult to defend cost-effectively. For keto supplement brands operating at scale, this case illustrates how a well-constructed patent portfolio can generate significant settlement leverage without reaching trial.
Individual defendant named — a pattern that raises personal liability stakes
The inclusion of Hadis Nuhanovic as an individual defendant alongside Buddibox LLC is a common enforcement tactic in supplement IP cases. Naming principals personally increases settlement urgency and can pierce corporate-structure defences. Companies in this sector should ensure their IP clearance processes are documented at both entity and individual level.
Axcess v Buddibox — key questions answered
Axcess Global Sciences asserted three US patents: US11020362B2, US10292952B2, and US11241403B2. All three relate to BHB (beta-hydroxybutyrate) ketone dietary supplement compositions. The accused products included more than 60 keto supplement SKUs sold under various brand names by Buddibox LLC and its principal Hadis Nuhanovic.
The case was dismissed with prejudice on 20 June 2024, approximately 174 days after filing, pursuant to a joint settlement agreement. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement terms. Financial terms and any licensing conditions are confidential and not available in the public record.
A dismissal with prejudice is a final disposition: Axcess Global Sciences cannot refile infringement claims against Buddibox or Nuhanovic for the same three patents and accused products. However, the retained court jurisdiction means AGS can enforce any breach of the settlement terms by motion in the Northern District of Georgia rather than initiating a new lawsuit.
Naming individual principals alongside the corporate defendant is a common enforcement strategy in patent cases, particularly in the supplement sector. It raises the personal financial stakes for the decision-maker, can address situations where corporate assets are limited, and may discourage future infringement by the same individual through other entities. The public record does not specify the legal theory under which Nuhanovic was individually named.
The breadth of the accused product list — spanning 60+ SKUs across dozens of brand names — suggests the asserted claims may cover common BHB formulation approaches rather than brand-specific implementations. Other companies formulating, distributing, or importing BHB ketone supplements in the US should consider an FTO analysis against US11020362B2, US10292952B2, and US11241403B2 to assess their exposure, particularly given that claim scope has never been tested in public litigation.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.