OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) - Elon Musk's legal representatives took on with OpenAI in court Tuesday as a federal judge weighed the billionaire's ask for a court order that would obstruct the ChatGPT maker from converting itself to a for-profit business.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers said it was a "stretch" for Musk to claim he will be irreparably harmed if she doesn't step in to stop OpenAI from moving forward with its transition from a not-for-profit lab to a for-profit corporation.

But the judge also raised issues about OpenAI and its relationship with service partner Microsoft and said she would not stop the case from relocating to trial as soon as next year so a jury can choose.

"It is possible that what Mr. Musk is saying is true. We ´ ll discover out. He ´ ll rest on the stand," she said.

Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, took legal action against the expert system business in 2015, first in a California state court and later in federal court, alleging it had betrayed its starting aims as a nonprofit research laboratory benefiting the public great. Musk had invested about $45 million in the start-up from its starting until 2018, his lawyer said Tuesday.

Musk escalated the legal conflict late last year, including new claims and accuseds and asking for a court order that would stop OpenAI ´ s prepares to transform itself into a for-profit service more completely. Musk also added his own AI company, xAI, as a plaintiff.

Also targeted by Musk's claim is OpenAI's close organization partner Microsoft and tech entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, a former OpenAI board member who likewise sits on Microsoft's board.

Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for authorizing the sort of preliminary injunction that Musk wants but hasn't yet ruled on the request. She did say she had "substantial issues" with 2 individuals connected to Microsoft on OpenAI's board - Hoffman and long time Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a "non-voting observer."

"So you want me to think that she was sitting there listening to all the discussions and not telling anyone? What would the point be for her to sit there and listen to everybody, if not to interact what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she actually needs to not exist," she said.

Hoffman, a co-founder of LinkedIn, has been on Microsoft ´ s board because quickly after the tech giant purchased the job networking website. He stepped down from OpenAI's board in 2023 to prevent disputes with his AI start-up, Inflection.

Templeton, who Musk also called as an offender, was added as a non-voting member of OpenAI ´ s board in the after-effects of Altman ´ s ouster after Satya Nadella looked for rocksoff.org more stability on the board. But months later on, thatswhathappened.wiki she was dropped from the OpenAI board as U.S. antitrust enforcers were revealing concerns about such plans on corporate boards.

The judge has managed a number of tech market cases consisting of Apple's battle with Epic Games, though she said Tuesday that Musk's case is "absolutely nothing like" that one. That case was likewise the last time she approved a preliminary injunction, in 2020, tandme.co.uk 8 months before the case went to trial.

Then-President Barack Obama designated Gonzalez Rogers to the federal bench in 2011.

Tuesday's hearing was originally set for January but was delayed after Musk's attorney Marc Toberoff said his house was damaged in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.

Musk, who did not attend the hearing, has alleged in the claim that the business are violating the terms of his foundational contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a "stretch" to claim "permanent damage" to Musk, and wiki.vst.hs-furtwangen.de called the case "billionaires vs. billionaires." She questioned why Musk invested tens of millions in OpenAI without a composed contract. Toberoff said it was due to the fact that the relationship between Altman and Musk at the time was "built on trust" and setiathome.berkeley.edu the 2 were very close.

"That is simply a great deal of cash" to invest "on a handshake," the judge said.

OpenAI has actually said Musk ´ s requested court order would "incapacitate OpenAI ´ s organization"and objective to the advantage of Musk and his own AI business and is based on "far-fetched" legal claims.

At the heart of the dispute is a 2017 internal power struggle at the new startup that caused Altman ending up being OpenAI ´ s CEO

. Emails divulged by OpenAI show Musk had actually also looked for to be CEO and grew frustrated after two other OpenAI co-founders said he would hold excessive power as a significant shareholder and chief executive if the start-up prospered in its goal to attain better-than-human AI called artificial general intelligence, or forum.altaycoins.com AGI. Musk has long voiced issues about how sophisticated forms of AI might threaten humanity.

Altman ultimately succeeded in ending up being CEO and has actually remained so except for a period in 2023 when he was fired and then renewed days later after the board that ousted him was changed.

OpenAI has sought to demonstrate Musk ´ s early assistance for the concept of making OpenAI a for-profit business so it could raise money for galgbtqhistoryproject.org the hardware and computer system power that AI needs.

Musk is not the only one tough OpenAI's for-profit shift. Facebook and Instagram parent Meta Platforms has asked California's attorney general of the United States to block it, and the workplace of Delaware's chief law officer has said it is examining the conversion.

It was not clear Tuesday when the case may go to trial. Musk's legal representatives initially said they would be prepared by June after some back-and-forth with the 2 sides the judge indicated it most likely won't be till June 2026 at the earliest, however likely early 2027.

O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.

-------