Applied Energetics, Inc. AERG US Equity
Applied Energetics, Inc. (OTC: AERG), an SEC filer in Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical Sys, closed at $1.02, -3.8%, on 2026-08-28, with a market cap of $244M as of 2026-08-27, a return on equity of -374.0%, a net margin of -3221.1% and 3-year sales growth of -29.3%. Institutional ownership, earnings history and filed financials are on the tabs below.
Legal & controls
Item 3 and Item 9A as filed · every verdict is the registrant’s own sentence, printed below it · a filing that fails an extraction gate reads “not extracted”
| Fiscal year | Filed | Item 3 | ICFR | disclosure controls | material weakness | Filing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-12-31 | 2026-03-30 | described here | NOT effective | NOT effective | remediated (prior year) | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On January 15, 2021, the company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum (GKN) and Ryan Whalen for malpractice and breach of New York Rules of Professional Conduct by both parties as former counsel to the company. On May 28, 2021, GKN and Mr. Whalen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 25, 2021, the company filed an opposition to the motion. On July 13, 2021, GKN and Mr. Whalen filed their reply brief. On March 30, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman signed an order denying the motion of GKN and Mr. Whalen to dismiss the company’s claim for malpractice and for rescission of the shares-for-fees agreement under which GKN and Whalen received 1,242,710 shares of the company’s common stock. The motion was partially granted as to the separate claim for violation of NYRPC 1.7 and 1.8 because the court found that it was duplicative of the malpractice claim. Motions for summary judgment in the case are fully briefed, and the judge held oral arguments on August 7, 2025. On September 17, 2025, the court issued an Opinion and Order denying both parties’ motions for Summary Judgment. . The… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our assessment under the criteria described above, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2025. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on that evaluation our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2025 primarily as a result of weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting as described below. Item 9A · material weakness · This assessment also took into consideration a material weakness cited by our auditors. | ||||||
| 2024-12-31 | 2025-03-28 | described here | NOT effective | NOT effective | disclosed | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On January 15, 2021, the company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Ryan Whalen for malpractice and breach of New York Rules of Professional Conduct by both parties as former counsel to the company. On May 28, 2021, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 25, 2021, the company filed an opposition to the motion. On July 13, 2021, Gusrae Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed their reply brief. On March 30, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman signed an order denying the motion of GKN and Mr. Whalen to dismiss the company’s claim for malpractice and for rescission of the shares-for-fees agreement under which GKN and Whalen received 1,242,710 shares of the company’s common stock. The motion was partially granted as to the separate claim for violation of NYRPC 1.7 and 1.8 because the court found that it was duplicative of the malpractice claim. The parties are currently engaged in discovery. No trial date has been set. On July 26, 2023, the company filed a complaint in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware against Gusrae Kaplan Nusb… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our assessment under the criteria described above, the CFO has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2024. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on that evaluation our Chief Executive Officer (and Principal Financial Officer) concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2024. Item 9A · material weakness · This assessment also took into consideration a material weakness cited by our auditors. | ||||||
| 2023-12-31 | 2024-03-26 | described here | NOT effective | NOT effective | disclosed | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On July 3, 2019, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and its partner, Ryan Whalen filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the company, its directors, officers, attorneys and a consultant. The action alleged libel, securities fraud and related claims. The company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on October 24, 2019. On December 13, 2019, Gusrae Kaplan and Mr. Whalen filed an opposition to the company’s motion. On January 10, 2020, the company filed a reply brief. On August 5, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of the action without prejudice. On January 15, 2021, the company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Ryan Whalen for malpractice and breach of New York Rules of Professional Conduct by both parties as former counsel to the company. On May 28, 2021, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 25, 2021, the company filed an opposition to the motion. On July 13, 2021, Gusrae Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed their reply brief. On March 30, 2022, United States Magistr… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our assessment under the criteria described above, the CFO has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2023. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on that evaluation our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2023. Item 9A · material weakness · This assessment also took into consideration a material weakness cited by our auditors. | ||||||
| 2022-12-31 | 2023-03-30 | described here | NOT effective | NOT effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On July 3, 2019, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and its partner, Ryan Whalen filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the company, its directors, officers, attorneys and a consultant. The action alleged libel, securities fraud and related claims. The company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on October 24, 2019. On December 13, 2019, Gusrae Kaplan and Mr. Whalen filed an opposition to the company’s motion. On January 10, 2020, the company filed a reply brief. On August 5, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of the action without prejudice. On January 15, 2021, the company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Ryan Whalen for malpractice and breach of New York Rules of Professional Conduct by both parties as former counsel to the company. On May 28, 2021, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 25, 2021, the company filed an opposition to the motion. On July 13, 2021, Gusrae Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed their reply brief. On March 30, 2022, United States Magistr… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our assessment under the criteria described above, the CFO has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2022. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on that evaluation our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2022. | ||||||
| 2021-12-31 | 2022-03-31 | described here | NOT effective | NOT effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On July 3, 2019, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and its partner, Ryan Whalen filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against the company, its directors, officers, attorneys and a consultant. The action alleged libel, securities fraud and related claims. The company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on October 24, 2019. On December 13, 2019, Gusrae Kaplan and Mr. Whalen filed an opposition to the company’s motion. On January 10, 2020, the company filed a reply brief. The United States District Court has not ruled on the motion. On August 5, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal of the action without prejudice. On January 15, 2021, the company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Ryan Whalen for malpractice and breach of New York Rules of Professional Conduct by both parties as former counsel to the company. On May 28, 2021, Gusrae, Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On June 25, 2021, the company filed an opposition to the motion. On July 13, 2021, Gusrae Kaplan & Nusbaum and Mr. Whalen fil… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our assessment under the criteria described above, the CEO/PFO has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2021. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on that evaluation our Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2021. | ||||||
5 of 5 annual reports on record have their filing text cached on this host; the rest are listed with their EDGAR link and no extraction, because this surface never fetches from SEC on a page load.
- Item 3 and Item 9A are located in the filing HTML already cached on this host and read with the same line-anchored item matcher and largest-gap body disambiguation the filing-narrative pass uses for Item 1A and Item 7 — no fetch, no model, no summarization.
- A heading is accepted as a section only when it is not a table-of-contents row (a trailing page number), not a quoted reference in prose, and names its own section; the span must then clear a per-item length band and carry readable text after the heading. Anything that fails a gate is served as 'not extracted' with the reason — never as a default value.
- An effectiveness conclusion is read only from a sentence that names its own control set (disclosure controls and procedures, or internal control over financial reporting) and states an outcome. Conditional sentences — the standard limitations paragraph and forward-looking remediation language — are excluded, because they are hypotheses rather than conclusions.
- When a filing's own sentences disagree — an effective conclusion beside an unremediated material-weakness disclosure, or two conclusions of opposite sign — no verdict is asserted. A wrong 'controls were effective' reading is worse than no reading.
- Every verdict is shown beside the verbatim sentence it was read from. The excerpt is the filing's own words, capped at 1,200 characters; the filing itself is one link away.