LOADING...
Musk loses lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman
Musk had sued Altman and OpenAI in 2024

Musk loses lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman

May 18, 2026
11:30 pm

What's the story

A jury in Oakland, California has ruled against Elon Musk in his high-profile lawsuit against Sam Altman and OpenAI. The verdict comes just days before Musk's SpaceX is expected to unveil its IPO prospectus. The three-week trial concluded with the jury taking nearly two hours to deliberate on the case.

Court's decision

Jury rejects Musk's allegations against Altman, OpenAI

The jury ruled in favor of Altman and OpenAI, rejecting Musk's allegations that they had breached their commitment to remain a non-profit. The court also dismissed claims of breach of charitable trust and unjust enrichment as "untimely." US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers presided over the case and agreed with the advisory jury's findings.

Appeal possibility

Musk's right to appeal reserved by his lead counsel

Musk's lead counsel, Steven Molo, has reserved his client's right to appeal. However, Judge Rogers said she's prepared to dismiss an appeal "on the spot." The judge emphasized that there is a "substantial amount of evidence to support the jury's finding," while concluding the trial.

Advertisement

Legal battle

Musk sued Altman, Microsoft in 2024

Musk sued Altman and OpenAI in 2024, claiming they violated their promise to keep the AI lab a non-profit. He also named Microsoft as a defendant in the suit, alleging that the tech giant helped OpenAI breach its charitable trust. However, these claims were also dismissed by the court.

Advertisement

Financial demands

Court did not meet demands of Musk's legal team

Musk's legal team sought to have OpenAI and Microsoft forfeit as much as $134 billion in "ill-gotten gains." They also wanted Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman removed from their positions, and the company's 2025 restructuring reversed. This restructuring had allowed for the expansion of its for-profit division. However, these demands were not met by the court.

Advertisement