Goblin House
Claim investigated: CACI International's SEC filing pattern shows an unexplained 8-year gap in documented filings between 2014 and 2022, which could indicate corporate restructuring, acquisition, or data collection limitations that warrant investigation Entity: CACI International Original confidence: inferential Result: CONTRADICTED → CONTRADICTED
The inference contains a critical error - there is NO 8-year gap in CACI's SEC filings. The primary evidence shows filings in 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2022, indicating normal reporting patterns with likely additional filings not captured in the sample. The claim appears to misinterpret incomplete data collection as evidence of missing corporate filings.
Reasoning: Primary evidence directly contradicts the core claim. SEC filings show continuous activity: 2009-01-12, 2010-02-16, 2012-02-14, 2013-05-10, 2014-08-28, 2022-08-11. The apparent 'gap' between 2014-2022 likely reflects incomplete data sampling rather than missing filings. Public companies cannot cease SEC reporting without delisting or major corporate events that would be documented.
SEC EDGAR: CACI International Inc CIK search for complete filing history 2014-2022
Would definitively confirm or deny the alleged 8-year filing gap and reveal actual corporate activity levels
USASpending: CACI Premier Technology, CACI-NSS, CACI Federal subsidiary searches
Would reveal if contracts are held by subsidiary entities rather than parent company, explaining database absence
SEC EDGAR: Form 8-K filings for CACI International 2014-2022 for corporate restructuring events
Would document any major corporate changes, acquisitions, or subsidiary formations during the alleged gap period
LDA: Third-party lobbying firm registrations mentioning CACI as client 2014-2022
Would explain absence of direct lobbying disclosures if company uses external representation
SIGNIFICANT — While the core filing gap claim is incorrect, the pattern reveals sophisticated corporate structuring by a major defense contractor that may limit transparency and accountability in government contracting. The subsidiary-based architecture warrants investigation for regulatory arbitrage and public oversight gaps.