G. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	6 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
G. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	Clinical Research Agreements In March 2013, the Company entered into an agreement with Aptiv Solutions to provide certain clinical research services in accordance with a master service agreement. The Company will reimburse Aptiv for costs incurred. The agreement required the Company to make $600,000 in advanced payments which are being credited back in $150,000 annual increments through December 2017. As of March 31, 2016, the total balance advanced is $300,000, of which $150,000 is classified as a current asset. In April 2013, the Company entered into a co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed. Under the agreement, Ergomed will contribute up to $10 million towards the study in the form of offering discounted clinical services in exchange for a single digit percentage of milestone and royalty payments, up to a specific maximum amount. In October 2015 the Company entered into a second co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed for an additional $2 million, for a total of $12 million. The Company accounted for the co-development and revenue sharing agreement in accordance with ASC 808 “Collaborative Arrangements”. The Company determined the payments to Ergomed are within the scope of ASC 730 “Research and Development.” Therefore, the Company will record the discount on the clinical services as a credit to research and development expense on its Statements of Operations. Since the Company entered into the co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed, it has incurred research and development expenses of approximately $15.7 million related to Ergomed’s services. This amount is net of Ergomed’s discount of approximately $5.3 million. During the six and three months ended March 31, 2016, the Company recorded, net of Ergomed’s discount, approximately $3.8 million and $1.8 million, respectively, as research and development expense related to Ergomed’s services. During the six and three months ended March 31, 2015, the Company recorded, net of Ergomed’s discount, approximately $3.2 million and $1.6 million, respectively, as research and development expense related to Ergomed’s services. In October 2013, the Company entered into two co-development and profit sharing agreements with Ergomed. One agreement supports the Phase I study being conducted at the Naval Medical Center, San Diego under a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the U.S. Navy for the development of Multikine as a potential treatment in HIV/HPV co-infected men and women with peri-anal warts. The other agreement focuses on the development of Multikine in HIV/HPV co-infected women with cervical dysplasia. Ergomed will assume up to $3 million in clinical and regulatory costs for each study. On October 31, 2013, the Company commenced arbitration proceedings against inVentiv Health Clinical, LLC, or inVentiv, the Company’s former clinical research organization (CRO). The arbitration claim, initiated under the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association, alleges (i) breach of contract, (ii) fraud in the inducement, and (iii) common law fraud. Currently, the Company is seeking at least $50 million in damages in its amended statement of claim. Based upon further analysis, however, the Company believes that its damages (direct and consequential) presently total over $150 million. On December 12, 2013, the former CRO filed a counterclaim, alleging breach of contract on the part of CEL-SCI and seeking at least $2,000,000 in damages. On December 20, 2013, the former CRO moved to dismiss certain claims. On June 24, 2014, the arbitrator denied the motion to dismiss. In an amended statement of claim, the Company asserted the claims set forth above as well as an additional claim for professional malpractice. The arbitrator subsequently granted inVentiv’s motion to dismiss the professional malpractice claim based on the “economic loss doctrine” under New Jersey law, a legal doctrine that, under certain circumstances, prohibits bringing a negligence-based claim alongside a claim for breach of contract. The arbitrator denied the remainder of inVentiv’s motion, which had sought to dismiss certain other aspects of the amended statement of claim. In particular, the arbitrator rejected inVentiv’s argument that several aspects of the amended statement of claim were beyond the arbitrator’s jurisdiction. In connection with the pending arbitration proceedings, inVentiv has asserted counterclaims against the Company for (i) breach of contract, seeking at least $2 million in damages for services allegedly performed by inVentiv; (ii) breach of contract, seeking at least $1 million in damages for the Company’s alleged use of inVentiv’s name in connection with publications and promotions in violation of the parties’ contract; (iii) opportunistic breach, restitution and unjust enrichment, seeking at least $20 million in disgorgement of alleged unjust profits allegedly made by the Company as a result of the purported breaches referenced in subsection (ii); and (iv) defamation, seeking at least $1 million in damages for allegedly defamatory statements made about inVentiv. The Company believes inVentiv’s counterclaims are meritless and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, if such defense is unsuccessful, and inVentiv successfully asserts any of its counterclaims, such an adverse determination could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results, financial condition and liquidity. In October 2015, CEL-SCI signed a funding agreement with a company established by Lake Whillans Litigation Finance, LLC, a firm specializing in funding litigation expenses. Pursuant to the agreement, an affiliate of Lake Whillans will provide CEL-SCI with up to $5,000,000 in funding for litigation expenses to support its $50,000,000 arbitration claims against inVentiv. The funding will be available to CEL-SCI if and when needed to fund the expenses of the ongoing arbitration and will only be repaid when CEL-SCI receives proceeds from the arbitration. Invoices received by CEL-SCI are recorded as a debit to legal expense and a credit to accounts payable. When the invoice is settled and Lake Whillans has made the payment to the Company’s law firm, the Company’s liability is released and is removed from the balance sheet through a credit to the gain on derecognition of legal fees, which is netted against legal fees. At March 31, 2016, $629,693 in legal fees were included in current liabilities because they had not yet been settled. These fees are expected to be paid by Lake Whillans and therefore, the Company has also recorded a receivable for the same amount. Excluding these fees, Lake Whillans has paid $2,624,108 in legal fees on behalf of the Company. As of March 31, 2016, the Company has recognized a gain of $3,253,802 on the derecognition of legal fees, which has been netted against legal fees and is recorded as a reduction of general and administration expenses on the Statement of Operations. As of March 31, 2016, Lake Whillans has committed to fund $2,375,892 in future legal fees. As part of the agreement with Lake Whillans, the law firm agreed to cap their fees and expenses for the arbitration at $5,000,000. The arbitration hearing on the merits (the “trial”) is expected to commence in the summer of 2016. Lease Agreements In August 2007, the Company leased a building near Baltimore, Maryland. The building was remodeled in accordance with the Company’s specifications so that it can be used by the Company to manufacture Multikine for the Company’s Phase 3 clinical trial and sales of the drug if approved by the FDA. The lease is for a term of twenty years and requires annual base rent to escalate each year at 3%. The Company is required to pay all real and personal property taxes, insurance premiums, maintenance expenses, repair costs and utilities. The lease allows the Company, at its election, to extend the lease for two ten-year periods or to purchase the building at the end of the 20-year lease. The Company was required to deposit the equivalent of one year of base rent in accordance with the contract. When the Company meets the minimum cash balance required by the lease, the deposit will be returned to the Company. The $1,670,917 deposit is included in non-current assets at March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015. The Company subleases a portion of its rental space on a month to month term lease, which requires a 30 day notice for termination. Effective February 1, 2016, the parties agreed to a 3% rental increase. As of that date, the Company receives $5,628 per month in rent for the subleased space. The Company leases its research and development laboratory under a 60 month lease which expires February 28, 2017. The operating lease includes escalating rental payments. The Company is recognizing the related rent expense on a straight line basis over the full 60 month term of the lease at the rate of $11,360 per month. As of March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015, the Company has recorded a deferred rent liability of $5,354 and $6,484, respectively. The Company leases office headquarters under a 60 month lease which expires June 30, 2020. The operating lease includes escalating rental payments. The Company is recognizing the related rent expense on a straight line basis over the full 60 month term of the lease at the rate $8,134 per month. As of March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015, the Company has recorded a deferred rent liability of $17,845 and $12,539, respectively. The Company leased office equipment under a capital lease arrangement. The term of the capital lease is 48 months and expires on September 30, 2016. The monthly lease payment is $1,025. The lease bears interest at approximately 6% per annum.

G. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

6 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2016

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Clinical Research Agreements

In March 2013, the Company entered into an agreement with Aptiv Solutions to provide certain clinical research services in accordance with a master service agreement. The Company will reimburse Aptiv for costs incurred. The agreement required the Company to make $600,000 in advanced payments which are being credited back in $150,000 annual increments through December 2017. As of March 31, 2016, the total balance advanced is $300,000, of which $150,000 is classified as a current asset.

In April 2013, the Company entered into a co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed. Under the agreement, Ergomed will contribute up to $10 million towards the study in the form of offering discounted clinical services in exchange for a single digit percentage of milestone and royalty payments, up to a specific maximum amount. In October 2015 the Company entered into a second co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed for an additional $2 million, for a total of $12 million. The Company accounted for the co-development and revenue sharing agreement in accordance with ASC 808 “Collaborative Arrangements”. The Company determined the payments to Ergomed are within the scope of ASC 730 “Research and Development.” Therefore, the Company will record the discount on the clinical services as a credit to research and development expense on its Statements of Operations. Since the Company entered into the co-development and revenue sharing agreement with Ergomed, it has incurred research and development expenses of approximately $15.7 million related to Ergomed’s services. This amount is net of Ergomed’s discount of approximately $5.3 million. During the six and three months ended March 31, 2016, the Company recorded, net of Ergomed’s discount, approximately $3.8 million and $1.8 million, respectively, as research and development expense related to Ergomed’s services. During the six and three months ended March 31, 2015, the Company recorded, net of Ergomed’s discount, approximately $3.2 million and $1.6 million, respectively, as research and development expense related to Ergomed’s services.

In October 2013, the Company entered into two co-development and profit sharing agreements with Ergomed. One agreement supports the Phase I study being conducted at the Naval Medical Center, San Diego under a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with the U.S. Navy for the development of Multikine as a potential treatment in HIV/HPV co-infected men and women with peri-anal warts. The other agreement focuses on the development of Multikine in HIV/HPV co-infected women with cervical dysplasia. Ergomed will assume up to $3 million in clinical and regulatory costs for each study.

On October 31, 2013, the Company commenced arbitration proceedings against inVentiv Health Clinical, LLC, or inVentiv, the Company’s former clinical research organization (CRO). The arbitration claim, initiated under the Commercial Rules of the American Arbitration Association, alleges (i) breach of contract, (ii) fraud in the inducement, and (iii) common law fraud. Currently, the Company is seeking at least $50 million in damages in its amended statement of claim. Based upon further analysis, however, the Company believes that its damages (direct and consequential) presently total over $150 million.

On December 12, 2013, the former CRO filed a counterclaim, alleging breach of contract on the part of CEL-SCI and seeking at least $2,000,000 in damages. On December 20, 2013, the former CRO moved to dismiss certain claims. On June 24, 2014, the arbitrator denied the motion to dismiss.

In an amended statement of claim, the Company asserted the claims set forth above as well as an additional claim for professional malpractice. The arbitrator subsequently granted inVentiv’s motion to dismiss the professional malpractice claim based on the “economic loss doctrine” under New Jersey law, a legal doctrine that, under certain circumstances, prohibits bringing a negligence-based claim alongside a claim for breach of contract. The arbitrator denied the remainder of inVentiv’s motion, which had sought to dismiss certain other aspects of the amended statement of claim. In particular, the arbitrator rejected inVentiv’s argument that several aspects of the amended statement of claim were beyond the arbitrator’s jurisdiction.

In connection with the pending arbitration proceedings, inVentiv has asserted counterclaims against the Company for (i) breach of contract, seeking at least $2 million in damages for services allegedly performed by inVentiv; (ii) breach of contract, seeking at least $1 million in damages for the Company’s alleged use of inVentiv’s name in connection with publications and promotions in violation of the parties’ contract; (iii) opportunistic breach, restitution and unjust enrichment, seeking at least $20 million in disgorgement of alleged unjust profits allegedly made by the Company as a result of the purported breaches referenced in subsection (ii); and (iv) defamation, seeking at least $1 million in damages for allegedly defamatory statements made about inVentiv. The Company believes inVentiv’s counterclaims are meritless and intends to vigorously defend against them. However, if such defense is unsuccessful, and inVentiv successfully asserts any of its counterclaims, such an adverse determination could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results, financial condition and liquidity.

In October 2015, CEL-SCI signed a funding agreement with a company established by Lake Whillans Litigation Finance, LLC, a firm specializing in funding litigation expenses. Pursuant to the agreement, an affiliate of Lake Whillans will provide CEL-SCI with up to $5,000,000 in funding for litigation expenses to support its $50,000,000 arbitration claims against inVentiv. The funding will be available to CEL-SCI if and when needed to fund the expenses of the ongoing arbitration and will only be repaid when CEL-SCI receives proceeds from the arbitration. Invoices received by CEL-SCI are recorded as a debit to legal expense and a credit to accounts payable. When the invoice is settled and Lake Whillans has made the payment to the Company’s law firm, the Company’s liability is released and is removed from the balance sheet through a credit to the gain on derecognition of legal fees, which is netted against legal fees. At March 31, 2016, $629,693 in legal fees were included in current liabilities because they had not yet been settled. These fees are expected to be paid by Lake Whillans and therefore, the Company has also recorded a receivable for the same amount. Excluding these fees, Lake Whillans has paid $2,624,108 in legal fees on behalf of the Company. As of March 31, 2016, the Company has recognized a gain of $3,253,802 on the derecognition of legal fees, which has been netted against legal fees and is recorded as a reduction of general and administration expenses on the Statement of Operations. As of March 31, 2016, Lake Whillans has committed to fund $2,375,892 in future legal fees. As part of the agreement with Lake Whillans, the law firm agreed to cap their fees and expenses for the arbitration at $5,000,000.

The arbitration hearing on the merits (the “trial”) is expected to commence in the summer of 2016.

Lease Agreements

In August 2007, the Company leased a building near Baltimore, Maryland. The building was remodeled in accordance with the Company’s specifications so that it can be used by the Company to manufacture Multikine for the Company’s Phase 3 clinical trial and sales of the drug if approved by the FDA. The lease is for a term of twenty years and requires annual base rent to escalate each year at 3%. The Company is required to pay all real and personal property taxes, insurance premiums, maintenance expenses, repair costs and utilities. The lease allows the Company, at its election, to extend the lease for two ten-year periods or to purchase the building at the end of the 20-year lease.

The Company was required to deposit the equivalent of one year of base rent in accordance with the contract. When the Company meets the minimum cash balance required by the lease, the deposit will be returned to the Company. The $1,670,917 deposit is included in non-current assets at March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015.

The Company subleases a portion of its rental space on a month to month term lease, which requires a 30 day notice for termination. Effective February 1, 2016, the parties agreed to a 3% rental increase. As of that date, the Company receives $5,628 per month in rent for the subleased space.

The Company leases its research and development laboratory under a 60 month lease which expires February 28, 2017. The operating lease includes escalating rental payments. The Company is recognizing the related rent expense on a straight line basis over the full 60 month term of the lease at the rate of $11,360 per month. As of March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015, the Company has recorded a deferred rent liability of $5,354 and $6,484, respectively.

The Company leases office headquarters under a 60 month lease which expires June 30, 2020. The operating lease includes escalating rental payments. The Company is recognizing the related rent expense on a straight line basis over the full 60 month term of the lease at the rate $8,134 per month. As of March 31, 2016 and September 30, 2015, the Company has recorded a deferred rent liability of $17,845 and $12,539, respectively.

The Company leased office equipment under a capital lease arrangement. The term of the capital lease is 48 months and expires on September 30, 2016. The monthly lease payment is $1,025. The lease bears interest at approximately 6% per annum.