A federal jury in Oakland found Musk's claims against OpenAI and Sam Altman time-barred; Judge Gonzalez Rogers dismissed the case; Musk vows to appeal.
A nine-member federal advisory jury in Oakland, California unanimously found on May 18 that Elon Musk filed his lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman too late, barring his claims under the applicable statute of limitations [1]. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accepted the verdict immediately and dismissed the case in full, including Musk's claims against Microsoft [2]. Musk characterized the outcome as a "technicality" and announced plans to appeal [1].
The suit, styled *Musk v. OpenAI, Altman, Brockman, Microsoft*, centered on Musk's allegations that OpenAI's conversion from a nonprofit to a for-profit structure breached its founding charitable trust and unjustly enriched its leadership [2]. Musk sought damages of up to $134 billion, the removal of Altman from his position, and a court order unwinding the for-profit restructuring [3]. The nine-day trial in Oakland proceeded as an advisory jury proceeding, a procedural mechanism under which the judge retained ultimate authority over the equitable claims at issue but solicited the jury's factual findings before ruling [2].
The jury's verdict turned entirely on timing, not the merits of whether OpenAI's nonprofit-to-for-profit transition violated its founding obligations [1]. By finding that Musk's claims were time-barred, the panel and the court did not resolve the underlying question of whether OpenAI's restructuring constituted an actionable breach of charitable trust, leaving that substantive issue unanswered as a matter of law [3]. The result insulates OpenAI, Altman, co-founder Greg Brockman, and Microsoft from liability in this action while preserving the structural conversion that Musk sought to reverse [2].
William Savitt led trial counsel for OpenAI; Steven Molo represented Musk [2]. The case drew national attention as a test of whether founding commitments made by a nonprofit AI organization could constrain its subsequent commercialization, a question that carries implications for AI governance and nonprofit accountability across the sector [3].
Musk's announced appeal means the Ninth Circuit will likely be asked to review the limitations ruling and, potentially, the threshold legal question of whether such charitable-trust claims were cognizable in the first place [1]. A successful appeal could revive the substantive merits phase and put OpenAI's conversion back before a federal court. For now, the dismissal clears the immediate litigation cloud over OpenAI's ongoing for-profit restructuring [3].