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 | 2026-03-06 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On August 5, 2025, a class action complaint was filed in federal district court in the District of Maryland, Southern Division, naming as defendants the Company and two of the Company’s executive officers, which was captioned In re Altimmune, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 8:25-cv-02581 (D. Md.) (the “Securities Class Action”). The Securities Class Action alleged that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, by making false and misleading statements and omissions of material fact to the investing public including the plaintiff and class members, who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s common stock between August 10, 2023 and June 25, 2025, including relating to pemvidutide and our IMPACT Phase 2b trial of pemvidutide in MASH. The plaintiff and class members sought, among other things, to have the action maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for the defendants to pay damages, interest, and an award of costs, including attorneys’ fees. On October 16, 2025, the court appointed lead plaintiffs for the litigation. On October 29, 2025, th… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2025. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2025, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2024-12-31 | 2025-02-27 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On May 6, 2024, a class action complaint was filed in federal district court in the District of Maryland, Southern Division, naming as defendants us and three of our executive officers, which is now captioned In re Altimmune, Inc. Securities Litigation, No. 24-cv-01315 (D. Md.) (the “Class Action”). The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, by making false and misleading statements and omissions of material fact to the investing public including the plaintiff and class members, who purchased or otherwise acquired our common stock between December 1, 2023 and April 26, 2024. The plaintiff and class members seek to have the action maintained as a class action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and for the defendants to pay damages, interest, and an award of costs, including attorneys’ fees. A substantially similar complaint, captioned Campanile v. Altimmune, Inc., et al., No. 8:24-cv-01918 (D. Md.), was also filed in the same court by another plaintiff on July 1, 2024 against the Company and three of its executive officers, based upon the same general se… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2024. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2024, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2023-12-31 | 2024-03-27 | none stated | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · We are not currently subject to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may be involved in various legal proceedings or investigations, which could be costly and impose a significant burden on management and employees. The results of any current or future litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, and regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources, and other factors. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2023, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2022-12-31 | 2023-02-28 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · In December 2019, a complaint was filed by Dr. De-chu Christopher Tang (“Plaintiff”) against us, which we removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The Plaintiff amended the complaint in February 2020 to include Vipin K. Garg and David J. Drutz as defendants, in addition to the Company (Dr. Garg, Dr. Drutz, and the Company are collectively referred to as “Defendants”). In March 2020 the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. On March 25, 2021, the court granted the motion and dismissed the action for lack of personal jurisdiction. In December 2021, the Plaintiff refiled the case in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, captioned Tang v. Altimmune, Inc., et al., Case No. 8:21-cv-03283 (D. Md.). Plaintiff, who is representing himself, asserts two causes of action: (1) breach of a prior settlement agreement by “robbing Plaintiff’s properties”; and (2) use by the Company of the “AdHigh system,” which Plaintiff claims is “proprietary.” On April 4, 2022, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss all claims in Plaintiff’s operative complaint, which motion is pending. We believe the allegations in the operative complaint… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2022. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2022, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
| 2021-12-31 | 2022-03-15 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · In December 2019, a complaint was filed by Dr. De-Chu Christopher Tang (“Plaintiff”) against us, which we removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The Plaintiff amended the complaint in February 2020 to include Vipin K. Garg and David J. Drutz as defendants, in addition to the Company (Dr. Garg, Dr. Drutz, and the Company are collectively referred to as “Defendants”). In March 2020 the Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The Court denied the motion without prejudice and allowed Plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff’s second amended complaint was filed on April 17, 2020, and Defendants filed a motion to dismiss that complaint on May 1, 2020. A hearing on Defendants’ motion to dismiss was held on May 20, 2020. Plaintiff, who is representing himself, alleges five causes of action as follows: (1) Defendants’ alleged retention of Plaintiff’s lab notebooks after the termination of his employment in 2012; (2) alleged plagiarism based on publishing an article without naming Plaintiff as an author; (3) use of the Adhigh System, which Plaintiff alleges he developed; (4) allegations that Defendants manipulated ou… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on this evaluation, our management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2021. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2021, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. | ||||||
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.