On April 7, Elon Musk filed an “amended” notice of remedies. In it, he appears to change the remedies he is seeking at his upcoming trial.
Originally, on Jan. 16, 2026, Musk described the monetary remedies as follows, with brief mention of potential injunctive relief:
Nowhere did Musk say that such monetary recovery would go to the non-profit OpenAI. Nor did he Musk specify any injunctive relief sought.
Musk’s “amended” notice of remedies
But, later, in the “amended” notice filed on April 7, just a few weeks before trial, Musk said all money recovered, should he prevail at trial, should go to the nonprofit OpenAI: “Musk therefore will not seek, either at trial or in equitable proceedings afterwards, a remedy directed to benefiting himself personally. The remedies Musk will seek are instead designed to undo exactly the harms identified above: to return all ill-gotten gains, including Microsoft’s, to the OpenAI charity….”
But that’s not all. Musk wants an injunction “[1] to strip Sam Altman and Greg Brockman of their positions of authority and the personal financial benefits they extracted from OpenAI’s illicit for-profit operations and conversion; [2] to require that both the nonprofit and any for-profit subsidiary honor OpenAI’s founding commitments to safety-first AI development and open research for the broad benefit of humanity; and, [3] to best achieve those goals, to unwind OpenAI’s for-profit conversion and restructuring.”
Of course, Elon Musk’s being the richest man in the world is a fact that most jurors will likely know. So, the amended relief sought by Musk likely sounds more appealing than lining Musk’s wallet more.
OpenAI’s opposition
Not suprisingly, OpenAI opposes (with co-defendant Microsoft) Musk’s belated amendment basically characterizing it as a bait and switch by Musk:
OpenAI also calls into question Musk’s coordinated media and social media campaign against OpenAI:
DOWNLOAD OPENAI’S RESPONSE