The courtroom fight between Tesla leader Elon Musk and OpenAI head Sam Altman has turned more pointed, with Altman now going after two of Musk’s closest friends.
In recently filed court documents, Altman has requested that a California federal judge require Musk’s wealth manager Jared Birchall and Neuralink operations director Shivon Zilis to turn over important communications at once.
Altman’s request is part of his defense against Musk’s 2024 racketeering suit. Altman is seeking to have the court order Birchall and Zilis to supply primary texts and emails within 72 hours. In case they default, Altman is seeking an extra, preliminary deposition ahead of their primary depositions later this month.
The case is being handled by U.S. District Court Magistrate Judge Thomas S. Hinton, who has yet to rule whether he will intervene. He has, however, ordered Zilis and Birchall’s attorneys, who represent Musk as well, to submit a status report by Friday to help with his decision.
Why Birchall and Zilis Matter
Both parties recognize that Jared Birchall and Shivon Zilis are key witnesses in the dispute currently being argued.
Birchall oversees Musk’s personal fortune in his family office, Excession. He also oversees the Musk Foundation and is CEO of Musk’s brain-chip company, Neuralink.
Zilis has strong connections to both OpenAI and Musk. She was a former director at OpenAI and now serves as director of operations at Neuralink. She is also the mother of some of Musk’s children, twins born in 2021 and two more children revealed in 2024.
According to Altman’s legal team, Zilis acted as a “conduit” between Musk and OpenAI’s co-founders during sensitive discussions in 2017. These conversations included proposals for restructuring OpenAI in a way that could have given Musk a significant equity stake. Altman argues that her text and email records could shed light on Musk’s intentions at the time and counter Musk’s claims in the lawsuit.
Musk’s Claims Against Altman
Musk filed the lawsuit against Altman and OpenAI’s leadership in 2024, alleging that the company was improperly converted from a nonprofit into a profit-driven business with an exclusive licensing agreement with Microsoft.
Musk claims he invested $40 million into OpenAI under the belief it would remain a purely altruistic research lab. Instead, he argues, it became a for-profit venture that unfairly benefits Altman and Microsoft.
One part of the suit, Musk’s “unlawful conversion” claim, will be tried in Oakland in March 2026, unless there is a settlement. A jury will then determine if Musk’s claims of self-dealing and unbargained-for restructuring are valid.
Altman’s Defense
Altman has referred to Musk’s assertions as hypocritical. His group maintains that Musk himself sought to transform OpenAI into a for-profit organization under his sole ownership in 2017. Proof from the communications of Zilis might establish that Musk insisted on an equity stake then, something that discredits his present suit.
“Her records may reveal details of OpenAI’s eventual creation of a for-profit arm in 2019 and Musk’s involvement in discussions years earlier,” Altman’s lawyers stated in filings earlier this month.
Dispute Over Evidence
Musk’s attorneys, who also represent Zilis and Birchall, countered that a substantial amount of material has already been provided. This includes communications from multiple work email accounts belonging to both Zilis and Birchall, along with relevant text messages.
They contend that requiring the duo to sit for two depositions would be “unreasonable.” Rather, they suggest rescheduling depositions if items that need to be produced in a timely manner cannot be done so. Depositions on both witnesses are already set later this month.
Altman’s lawyers, however, maintain that delays in getting the complete range of emails and texts are impeding their capacity to present an effective defense.
What Comes Next
The standoff highlights the increasingly adversarial nature of the Musk v. Altman court fight, which has already given rise to several pretrial skirmishes. Judge Hinton’s ruling in the next several days will decide whether Zilis and Birchall must comply with speedy disclosure demands and possibly further questioning.
As trial draws near in March, both camps are racing to accumulate as much information as they can. For Altman, being able to view Zilis’s correspondence could be the turning point for diminishing Musk’s version of events. For Musk, keeping his close circle away from further legal hassle could be the way to maintain his plan.
Either way, if the battle over two of Musk’s closest lieutenants is any indication, the drama is only intensified in a high-stakes case whose implications reach far beyond the internal politics of OpenAI, tweaking questions of corporate governance, intellectual property, and the direction of AI development itself.
Leo Cruz brings sharp insights into the world of politics, offering balanced reporting and analysis on the latest policies, elections, and global political events. With years of experience covering campaigns and interviewing world leaders, Leo ensures readers are always informed and engaged.
