A California jury ruled unanimously that Elon Musk waited too long to bring his lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI over the company’s direction and corporate structure. The nine-member advisory jury took less than two hours to conclude that the case fell outside the statute of limitations.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers accepted the verdict and dismissed the lawsuit after a three-week trial held in Oakland. The Tesla CEO filed the lawsuit in 2024, alleging that OpenAI had abandoned its nonprofit founding mission by moving toward a for-profit structure linked to major corporate investment.
Jury Dismisses Musk’s Lawsuit
Jurors confined their ruling to the question of timing and left Musk’s allegations about OpenAI’s nonprofit mission entirely unexamined. A nine-member advisory jury unanimously determined that Musk filed the lawsuit outside the statute of limitations.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers accepted the verdict and dismissed the case. “I’ve always said I would accept the jury’s verdict,” Gonzalez Rogers said after issuing her decision. “I think there’s a substantial amount of evidence to support the jury’s finding.”
OpenAI’s Nonprofit Origins
OpenAI launched in 2015 as a nonprofit research organization focused on developing artificial intelligence for the benefit of humanity. Musk joined Altman and Greg Brockman as one of the organization’s founding backers, donating $38 million in early funding over several years.
OpenAI’s founders initially promoted open research and broad public access to the development of artificial intelligence. Sarah Eddy, an attorney representing OpenAI’s defendants, later argued Musk’s contributions came “with no strings attached
,” meaning Musk “does not have a charitable trust to enforce.”
OpenAI’s Corporate Changes
By 2017, OpenAI leadership believed additional funding structures were necessary to compete for computing power and researchers. OpenAI went on to build a for-profit subsidiary structure that would later become the backbone of Musk’s legal challenge. Musk alleged that Altman “stole a charity” after OpenAI grew its commercial footprint.
Steven Molo, Musk’s lead attorney, argued OpenAI treated the nonprofit like a “shell” after creating the for-profit subsidiary and funneling employees and intellectual property into the commercial entity. OpenAI’s lawyers argued that Musk was originally in favor of the for-profit structure before relations between the founders broke down.
Musk’s Departure And Later Criticism
Musk wanted control of OpenAI and proposed becoming chief executive officer, but the other founders rejected the idea. Altman testified during the trial, “Musk wanted to be CEO. I was extremely uncomfortable with it.” Musk left OpenAI’s board in 2018 after the disagreement. A year and a half before filing the lawsuit, Musk launched xAI, a for-profit AI company that later merged with SpaceX.
OpenAI argued Musk’s lawsuit targeted a direct competitor after OpenAI succeeded without him. During cross-examination, Steven Molo asked Sam Altman whether he was “completely trustworthy.
” Altman responded, “I believe I am an honest and trustworthy businessperson.”
Microsoft’s Investments And Musk’s Lawsuit
Between 2019 and 2023, Microsoft invested $13 billion in OpenAI and was named a defendant in Musk’s lawsuit, together with OpenAI leadership. Musk’s legal team sought up to $180 billion in “ill-gotten gains” to be returned to OpenAI’s nonprofit foundation.
Elon Musk also pushed the court to remove Altman and Brockman from their leadership roles, reverse OpenAI’s 2025 restructuring into a public benefit corporation, and dismantle the for-profit entity entirely. Michael Wetter, a Microsoft corporate development executive, testified that Microsoft generated $9.5 billion in revenue from the OpenAI partnership as of March 2025.
Another Microsoft executive took the stand and told the court that total spending tied to the partnership had gone past $100 billion. Microsoft later stated, “The facts and the timeline in this case have long been clear, and we welcome the jury’s decision to dismiss these claims as untimely.”
What Happened During The Trial?
The three-week trial examined OpenAI’s history, internal disputes, and transition into a commercial AI company. Musk testified about the timing of the alleged misconduct and said, “Thinking that someone might steal your car is not the same as someone stealing it. I would have filed a lawsuit sooner if I thought they had stolen the charity sooner.”
OpenAI attorney William Savitt argued the case was designed to damage a competitor and stated in closing arguments, “Mr. Musk may have the Midas touch in some areas, but not in AI.”
Savitt later told reporters outside the courthouse, “The finding of the jury confirms that what this lawsuit was was a hypocritical attempt to sabotage a competitor and to overcome a long history of very bad predictions about what OpenAI has been and will become.” Savitt also stated, “We were pleased that the jury saw the evidence as we did — that is to say, very conclusively tilting in one direction.”
The Verdict And What Musk Wanted From The Case
Jurors returned their verdict in the middle of a remedies hearing that was already in progress inside the courtroom. Deliberations had started at 8:30 a.m. Pacific time. At 10:23 a.m., courtroom deputy Edwin Cuenco handed Judge Gonzalez Rogers a note before she announced, “We have a verdict.”
None of the principal figures, including Musk, Altman, and Brockman, attended the courtroom when the decision was delivered. Lawyers representing OpenAI and Microsoft exchanged hugs after the ruling. Steven Molo later described the decision as focused on “technical legal issues” and stated in court, “We want to get going on the appeal, with all due respect to the court.”
Outside the courthouse, attorney Marc Toberoff said, “At its core, is about preserving charities from this kind of exploitation. If they get away with it, they shouldn’t.” Musk later wrote on X, “the judge & jury never actually ruled on the merits of the case, just on a calendar technicality.”
Molo stated the appeal would partly rely on the continuing violation doctrine. OpenAI separately raised $122 billion in March 2026 at a valuation of more than $850 billion, as the company prepared for a possible public offering that could value the company at $1 trillion.
