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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-07-31 | 2025-09-29 | as filed | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · Legal proceedings disclosure is presented in Note 22 to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 to Part II of this Annual Report. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2025 was effective based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 31, 2025. | ||||||
| 2024-07-31 | 2024-10-15 | as filed | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · Legal proceedings disclosure is presented in Note 23 to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 to Part II of this Annual Report. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2024 was effective based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 31, 2024. | ||||||
| 2023-07-31 | 2023-10-16 | as filed | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · Legal proceedings disclosure is presented in Note 23 to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 to Part II of this Annual Report. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2023 was effective based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 31, 2023. | ||||||
| 2022-07-31 | 2022-10-14 | as filed | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · Legal proceedings disclosure is presented in Note 23 to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 to Part II of this Annual Report. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2022 was effective based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 31, 2022. | ||||||
| 2021-07-31 | 2021-10-14 | described here | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · On January 22, 2019, Jose Rosales filed a putative class action against IDT America, IDT Domestic Telecom and IDT International in California state court alleging certain violations of employment law. Plaintiff alleges that these companies failed to compensate members of the putative class in accordance with California law. In August 2019, we filed a cross complaint against Rosales alleging trade secret and other violations. The parties are now seeking court approval of a settlement agreement. On April 24, 2018, Sprint Communications Company L.P. filed a patent infringement claim against us and certain of our affiliates in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,298,064; 6,330,224; 6,343,084; 6,452,932; 6,463,052; 6,473,429; 6,563,918; 6,633,561; 6,697,340; 6,999,463; 7,286,561; 7,324,534; 7,327,728; 7,505,454; and 7,693,131. Plaintiff was seeking damages and injunctive relief. On June 28, 2018, Sprint dismissed the complaint without prejudice. We are evaluating the underlying claim, and at this stage, are unable to estimate our potential liability, if any. We intend to vigorously defend any claim of infringement of the liste… Item 9A · ICFR · Based on our evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of July 31, 2021 was effective based on the criteria established in the Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of July 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.