lawsuits
Musk v. Altman — OpenAI Lawsuit Tracker
A source-backed tracker for Musk v. Altman, the federal case between Elon Musk and OpenAI's Sam Altman — parties, docket, allegations, and current status.
Musk v. Altman is the marquee case of the AI Wars: a federal lawsuit in which Elon Musk is suing OpenAI, its CEO Sam Altman, co-founder Greg Brockman, and a web of OpenAI entities — with Microsoft and an Altman-linked investment fund drawn in — over what Musk says was a betrayal of OpenAI’s founding nonprofit mission. This page tracks the case from the public court record, and keeps a hard line between what the docket actually shows and what each side merely alleges.
Case File
| Field | Entry | Source posture |
|---|---|---|
| Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland) | Court record |
| Case number | 4:24-cv-04722-YGR | Court record |
| Date filed (federal) | August 5, 2024 | Court docket |
| Judge | Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers | Court docket |
| Nature of suit | 470 — Racketeer/Corrupt Organization (civil RICO) | Court docket (Musk’s pleaded theory) |
| Lead defendants | Samuel Altman, Gregory Brockman, OpenAI entities, Microsoft, Aestas Management | Court docket |
| Docket size | 1,600+ entries | Court docket |
| Status | Proceeded to trial in 2026; court ordered briefing on remaining claims (June 2026) | Court docket |
What Musk Alleges
Per the court’s summary of the complaint, Musk alleges he was fraudulently induced to help found and fund OpenAI as a nonprofit dedicated to open, public-benefit AI, and that Altman and Brockman later steered it toward a closed, for-profit structure that concentrated value with Microsoft and affiliated for-profit entities. Musk’s pleading is coded as civil RICO — racketeer/corrupt organization (nature of suit 470).
These are allegations in a filing, not findings of liability. The RICO code reflects the theory Musk chose to plead; it is not a court determination that racketeering occurred.
What OpenAI Says
OpenAI has publicly disputed Musk’s account. In a March 5, 2024 post, the company gave its own version of Musk’s early involvement and departure and said it intended to move to dismiss his claims. Treat OpenAI’s statements as one side of an active dispute, not a neutral finding.
Docket Timeline (primary record)
- August 5, 2024 — Musk v. Altman et al docketed in the Northern District of California after Musk withdrew an earlier state-court action.
- 2024–2026 — Heavy motion practice and amended pleadings expand the defendants to OpenAI’s corporate web, Microsoft, and Aestas Management; the docket grows past 1,600 entries.
- May 29, 2026 — Admitted trial exhibits: joint submission of transcripts of videos presented at trial by Elon Musk (Exhibits 1700–1709), filed by Musk counsel Steven Molo. The docket reflects that the case reached trial.
- June 10, 2026 — Judge Gonzalez Rogers signs an order setting a joint briefing schedule for the remaining claims.
- June 24, 2026 — The OpenAI/Altman defendants and Aestas file a stipulation and proposed order on the briefing schedule for plaintiffs’ remaining claims.
The case is not terminated. As of the last source check, the court is managing remaining claims after a trial phase.
Claim Status
| Statement | Label | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| OpenAI launched in 2015 as a nonprofit with Musk among its co-chairs | Verified | OpenAI’s own launch record |
| Musk was “fraudulently induced” and defendants ran a racketeering enterprise | Alleged | Musk’s complaint |
| The suit is pleaded as civil RICO (nature of suit 470) | Verified | Court docket |
| The case reached trial; remaining claims are being briefed (June 2026) | Verified | Court docket |
| Who ultimately prevails or is liable | Undetermined | No verdict asserted on this page |
Why It Matters
This is not a celebrity spat. It is the legal stress-test of the question underneath the entire AI industry: can a founding nonprofit mission survive the gravity of frontier-AI economics? The same forces show up across Muskularity — the cost of frontier compute and Colossus, the meaning of “open,” Microsoft’s role as OpenAI’s capital and cloud partner, and Musk’s competing bet in xAI and Grok. However the remaining claims resolve, the trial record itself is now a primary-source archive of how OpenAI was built and governed.
Receipts
- Grade A — primary docket: CourtListener: Musk v. Altman (docket 69013420)
- Grade A — court: N.D. Cal. case page, 4:24-cv-04722-YGR
- Company response: OpenAI and Elon Musk
See also the Receipts hub and the full Lawsuits tracker.
Editorial rule: “alleges” for complaint claims, “argues/responds” for party filings, “the court held” only for actual orders, “jury found” only on a verdict in the record. Docket dates and source links stay visible.