Jury Finds Musk's 2024 OpenAI Suit Time‑Barred; Judge Immediately Enters Verdict

A nine‑person jury on Monday unanimously concluded that claims in Elon Musk’s 2024 lawsuit against OpenAI were barred by the three‑year statute of limitations, and Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers adopted the verdict almost immediately. The ruling effectively dismissed the case on timing grounds while leaving the underlying substantive accusations unresolved, setting the stage for an appeal.

Musk’s suit followed his earlier $38 million donation to help establish OpenAI as a nonprofit. He later alleged the organization created a for‑profit arm that depleted the nonprofit’s funding while enriching executives including Sam Altman and Greg Brockman. Jurors found evidence suggesting Musk learned of OpenAI’s restructuring plans as early as 2021, which the panel treated as the event that started the limitations clock.

Because the jury decided the case on timing, Altman and Brockman were found not liable on Musk’s claims without a determination on whether they personally enriched themselves. The ruling also cleared Microsoft, an investor named in the suit, of allegations that it aided an alleged get‑rich scheme. Microsoft issued a statement welcoming the dismissal and saying it remains committed to its partnership with OpenAI to "advance and scale AI for people and organizations around the world."

Musk responded on X, calling the decision a "calendar technicality" and restating his contention that Altman and Brockman "did in fact enrich themselves by stealing a charity." His legal team, led in part by attorney Marc Toberoff, confirmed it will file an appeal in the Ninth Circuit, arguing the core disputes over OpenAI’s structure and conduct remain unresolved despite the procedural ruling.

Courtroom dynamics drew attention during and after the trial. Musk testified earlier but was not present for the verdict; Altman and Brockman also did not attend when jurors announced their decision. Observers noted visible emotion in the room: OpenAI attorney William Savitt, who spent days cross‑examining Musk, was seen smiling broadly, while Musk’s lawyers were described as appearing "sunken in their chairs."

Procedural details included a Musk lawyer apologizing after Musk failed to comply with a court order to remain available for further testimony, an absence the defense linked to his attendance at an international summit. After the verdict, Judge Gonzalez Rogers thanked jurors and told them they could speak about the case publicly when they felt comfortable. With an appeal now pledged, the dispute is set to continue through further litigation.