You are not excused, but you can leave for the day.
While a California courtroom worked through the final days of a $150 billion civil dispute he initiated, Elon Musk crossed the Pacific to Beijing alongside President Trump, missing both the last witness testimony and closing arguments in his lawsuit against OpenAI's Sam Altman. The case cuts to a deeper question about the soul of artificial intelligence — whether the technology should serve humanity as a nonprofit mission or be steered by market forces — and Musk's physical absence from its conclusion adds an ironic layer to his stated moral urgency. A judge had warned he could be recalled to the stand, yet the law did not forbid him from leaving, leaving the wisdom of his departure to be judged by history as much as by the court.
- Musk filed a $150 billion lawsuit claiming Altman betrayed OpenAI's founding nonprofit mission, seeking to remove him from the board and reverse the company's commercial turn.
- The trip to Beijing landed on the sharpest possible days — final witness testimony Wednesday, closing arguments Thursday — meaning Musk missed the trial's entire endgame.
- Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers had explicitly told Musk he was 'not excused,' leaving open the possibility that OpenAI's lawyers could demand he return to the stand.
- No law barred his travel — civil proceedings carry fewer constraints than criminal ones — but the optics of the world's richest plaintiff flying to China mid-trial are difficult to ignore.
- OpenAI's legal team argues Musk's real motive is protecting his own AI venture, xAI, and his conspicuous absence may hand them a narrative gift as closing arguments unfold.
Elon Musk boarded a flight to Beijing on Tuesday night, crossing the Pacific as a California courtroom entered the final days of his $150 billion lawsuit against OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman. He traveled alongside President Trump for meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping — arriving just as the last witness testimony was scheduled and closing arguments were set to follow. He would miss both.
The lawsuit is rooted in a foundational dispute: Musk co-founded OpenAI as a nonprofit in 2015 but has since departed, and now claims Altman steered the organization away from its original mission in pursuit of profit. Musk wants Altman removed from the board, the company returned to nonprofit status, and millions redirected to its charitable arm. OpenAI counters that Musk is acting in self-interest, seeking to hobble a rival to his own AI company, xAI.
The travel raised immediate legal questions. In late April, Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers had told Musk plainly that he was 'not excused' after his testimony — language that preserved OpenAI's ability to recall him to the stand. She did not, however, explicitly prohibit international travel, and civil proceedings impose fewer restrictions on parties and witnesses than criminal ones. Musk was not legally required to remain.
Whether the choice was wise is another matter. His silence in response to press inquiries, combined with his departure at the trial's most consequential moment, projects either deep confidence or studied indifference. As the proceedings close without him present, what OpenAI's lawyers decide to do next — and how the judge weighs his absence — may prove as telling as anything said in the courtroom itself.
Elon Musk boarded a plane to Beijing on Tuesday night, crossing the Pacific while a California courtroom worked through the final days of his $150 billion lawsuit against OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman. He arrived in the Chinese capital on Wednesday, traveling alongside President Trump and other business leaders for meetings with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The timing was sharp: the last witness testimony in the case was scheduled for Wednesday, with closing arguments set for Thursday. Musk would miss both.
The lawsuit centers on a fundamental disagreement about OpenAI's direction. Musk co-founded the organization as a nonprofit in 2015 alongside Altman, but has since departed and now claims Altman abandoned the company's original mission in pursuit of profit. Musk is asking the court to remove Altman from the board, convert OpenAI back to a nonprofit structure, and transfer millions to the organization's charitable arm. OpenAI's legal team counters that Musk is motivated by self-interest—specifically, to advantage his own artificial intelligence venture, xAI.
The question of whether Musk should have left the country during active litigation is one that may yet surface in court. In late April, as Musk finished his testimony, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of San Francisco made clear he remained subject to recall. "Mr. Musk, you are not excused, but you can leave for the day," the judge said from the bench, according to court records. That language—not excused—signals the possibility that OpenAI's lawyers could request his return to the stand for additional questioning.
Yet the judge did not explicitly order Musk to stay within reach of the courthouse or forbid international travel. In civil cases, parties and witnesses operate under different constraints than in criminal proceedings. Musk, who holds the dual status of both a party to the lawsuit and a witness in it, was not required to be present for every moment of trial. The law permitted his absence. Whether his choice to leave the country while the case remained active—and while he could still be called back—was wise is a separate matter.
Musk did not respond to requests for comment about his travel. The absence itself, however, speaks to a certain confidence or indifference about the proceedings. As the world's richest person, he has resources to manage legal exposure that most litigants do not. Whether that confidence is warranted will likely depend on what OpenAI's lawyers decide to do next, and whether Judge Gonzalez Rogers views his departure as relevant to how the case should be resolved.
Citações Notáveis
Mr. Musk, you are not excused, but you can leave for the day.— U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why would Musk leave the country while his own lawsuit is still active?
The judge didn't forbid it. In civil cases, you're not locked down the way you would be in criminal court. But there's a difference between what's legal and what looks good.
So the judge said he could be recalled. What does that actually mean?
It means OpenAI's lawyers can ask to put him back on the stand if they think there's more to get out of him. He's not done testifying just because his turn ended.
And he's in China while that's happening?
Yes. The last testimony was Wednesday, closing arguments Thursday. He'll be gone for both. It's a calculated move—either he doesn't think they'll recall him, or he doesn't care if they do.
What's the lawsuit actually about?
Musk says Altman broke the original promise. OpenAI was supposed to stay nonprofit, focused on the mission. Now it's chasing money. Musk wants it reverted, wants Altman off the board.
And OpenAI's response?
They say he's just trying to help his own AI company, xAI. That he's sore about being left behind.
Does his absence during closing arguments hurt his case?
It could. It sends a message—either that he's confident, or that he doesn't take the proceedings seriously. A judge notices those things.