Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Fact check: Does Apex Force have SEC filings mentioning Mehmet Oz or his companies?
Executive Summary
The available SEC-related documents in the provided dataset do not support a claim that Apex Force is mentioned alongside Mehmet Oz or his companies; one older filing independently references Mehmet Oz in connection with SIGA Technologies but does not mention Apex Force. Across filings dated from 2009 through 2025 in the supplied material, reviewers find no direct SEC disclosure tying Mehmet Oz or his known CIK [1] to any entity named Apex Force or to "Apex" companies included in these extracts (p1_s1, [3], [6], [6]–[7], [7]–p3_s3).
1. What the documents explicitly claim — no Apex Force link appears in the sample filings
The set of provided analyses consistently reports that the specific SEC filings examined do not name Apex Force or link Mehmet Oz to firms labeled Apex. The lone exception is a 2009 ownership entry that references Mehmet Oz by CIK and records a relationship with SIGA Technologies, Inc., but that same note explicitly does not mention Apex Force [2]. Multiple more recent filings — including proxy statements and 10-Ks from 2018, 2019 and a 2024 prospectus supplement — were analyzed and similarly show no mention of Mehmet Oz or any Apex Force entity within the excerpts supplied (p1_s2, [6], [6]–[7], p3_s1). This indicates that within the audited sample, there is no documented SEC disclosure connecting Oz to Apex Force.
2. Dates and coverage: older isolated Oz reference versus recent comprehensive non-mentions
Chronology matters in public filings. The only specific reference to Mehmet Oz in the dataset appears in a 2009 ownership record [2], which lists Oz by CIK and a relationship with SIGA Technologies, not Apex Force. Later documents in the dataset span 2018, 2019 and 2024 (p1_s3, [6]–[7], p3_s1) and were reviewed for mentions of Oz or Apex-related entities; those filings contain no such references. A 2025 DEF 14A entry included in the dataset likewise lacks any Oz–Apex linkage [3]. This pattern shows an isolated historical mention of Oz tied to a different company and a series of more recent, unrelated filings that fail to corroborate any connection to Apex Force.
3. How varied filings were examined and what that implies about search completeness
The supplied materials cover different filing types — ownership entries, proxy statements (DEF 14A), Form 10-Ks, and prospectus supplements (424B2) — across several issuers (Catalyst Pharmaceuticals, ResMed, Carlyle Secured Lending, and others referenced via search-interface excerpts) (p1_s2, [6], [7], [7]–p3_s3). These represent diverse filing formats where an ownership disclosure or related-party note would commonly appear if a material relationship existed. The consistent absence of Apex Force or Mehmet Oz across these multiple document types in the sample suggests the dataset would likely have captured any straightforward SEC disclosure tying them together, yet none was found (p1_s1–p3_s3).
4. Limitations in the dataset and what remains unproven by these excerpts
The provided analyses are limited to specific excerpts and identified filings; they are not a full EDGAR sweep for every company name, CIK, or variant of "Apex" and thus cannot conclusively prove the absence of any SEC filing anywhere that connects Oz to an entity named Apex Force. Several documents in the sample are even described as containing JavaScript search-interface code rather than full filing text, signaling gaps in accessible content [4] [5]. Therefore the factual conclusion that can be drawn from this dataset alone is narrow: within these reviewed documents there is no evidence of a Mehmet Oz–Apex Force linkage, but a comprehensive EDGAR search across all filings, aliases, and CIKs would be required to state absence universally (p1_s1–p3_s3).
5. Final synthesis — what the evidence supports and what further steps are logical
Based on the supplied, dated analyses, the evidence supports one clear factual statement: no SEC filing in the provided sample names Apex Force in connection with Mehmet Oz or his CIK; the only Oz mention is an older 2009 ownership record tied to SIGA Technologies (p1_s1, [3], [6], [6]–p3_s3). To move from qualified absence in this sample to a definitive public-record conclusion would require a targeted EDGAR search using Oz’s CIK [1], synonyms for “Apex Force,” and corporate affiliates across the SEC database and state filings. Until such a comprehensive search is performed, the available documents simply demonstrate a lack of corroborating SEC disclosure tying Oz to Apex Force within the materials provided (p1_s1–p3_s3).