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 | 2026-02-09 | in the notes | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · See Note 20 – Commitments and Contingencies – Litigation to the Consolidated Financial Statements, which is hereby incorporated by reference in response to this item. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on management’s assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2025, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2025. | ||||||
| 2024-12-31 | 2025-02-13 | in the notes | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · See Note 20 – Commitments and Contingencies – Litigation to the Consolidated Financial Statements - Part IV, Item 15, which is hereby incorporated by reference in response to this item. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on management’s assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2024, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2024. | ||||||
| 2023-12-31 | 2024-02-12 | in the notes | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · See Note 20 – Commitments and Contingencies – Litigation to the Consolidated Financial Statements - Part IV, Item 15, which is hereby incorporated by reference in response to this item. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on management’s assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2023, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2023. | ||||||
| 2022-12-31 | 2023-02-14 | in the notes | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · See Note 20— Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements - Part IV, Item 15, which is hereby incorporated by reference in response to this item. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on management’s assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2022, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company were effective at the reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2022. | ||||||
| 2021-12-31 | 2022-02-17 | in the notes | effective | effective | none in Item 9A | EDGAR |
Item 3 · See Note 20— Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements - Part IV, Item 15, which is hereby incorporated by reference in response to this item. Item 9A · ICFR · Based on management’s assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2021, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria. Item 9A · disclosure controls · Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures of the Company were effective at the reasonable assurance level 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.