OAKLAND, Calif. (AP) - Elon Musk's lawyers 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 transforming 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 damaged if she doesn't intervene to stop OpenAI from progressing with its shift from a nonprofit research study laboratory to a for-profit corporation.

But the judge likewise raised concerns about OpenAI and ura.cc its relationship with company partner Microsoft and said she wouldn't stop the case from relocating to trial as soon as next year so a jury can choose.

"It is plausible that what Mr. Musk is stating holds true. We ´ ll discover. He ´ ll rest on the stand," she said.

Musk, an early OpenAI investor and board member, took legal action against the expert system company last year, initially in a California state court and later in federal court, declaring it had betrayed its founding aims as a not-for-profit research laboratory benefiting the general public excellent. Musk had invested about $45 million in the start-up from its founding till 2018, his lawyer said Tuesday.

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

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

Gonzalez Rogers said she has a high bar for authorizing the sort of initial injunction that Musk wants but hasn't yet ruled on the demand. She did state she had "substantial issues" with 2 people linked to Microsoft on OpenAI's board - Hoffman and longtime Microsoft executive Deanna Templeton, who was a "non-voting observer."

"So you want me to believe that she was sitting there listening to all the conversations and not informing anyone? What would the point be for her to sit there and listen to everyone, if not to communicate what she was listening? There would be no point for her to be there, which is why she actually must not exist," she said.

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

Templeton, who Musk also named as an accused, was included as a non-voting member of OpenAI ´ s board in the after-effects of Altman ´ s ouster after Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella looked for more stability on the board. But months later, she was dropped from the OpenAI board as U.S. antitrust enforcers were expressing concerns about such arrangements on business boards.

The judge has actually dealt with a variety of tech industry 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 also the last time she approved an initial injunction, in 2020, 8 months before the case went to trial.

Obama appointed Gonzalez Rogers to the federal bench in 2011.

Tuesday's hearing was initially set for January however was postponed after Musk's lawyer Marc Toberoff said his home was damaged in the Pacific Palisades wildfire.

Musk, who did not go to the hearing, orcz.com has declared in the claim that the business are breaking the terms of his fundamental contributions to the charity. Judge Gonzalez Rogers called it a "stretch" to claim "irreparable harm" to Musk, and called the case "billionaires vs. billionaires." She questioned why Musk invested tens of millions in OpenAI without a written contract. Toberoff said it was because the relationship in between Altman and Musk at the time was "constructed on trust" and the two were extremely close.

"That is just a lot of cash" to invest "on a handshake," the judge said.

OpenAI has said Musk ´ s asked for court order would "debilitate OpenAI ´ s service"and mission to the benefit of Musk and his own AI business and is based on "improbable" legal claims.

At the heart of the dispute is a 2017 internal power struggle at the recently established startup that led to Altman ending up being OpenAI ´ s CEO

. Emails revealed by OpenAI reveal 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 startup was successful in its objective to attain better-than-human AI called synthetic basic intelligence, or coastalplainplants.org AGI. Musk has long voiced issues about how advanced forms of AI could threaten humanity.

Altman eventually prospered in becoming CEO and has remained so other than for a period in 2023 when he was fired and then reinstated days later on after the board that ousted him was changed.

OpenAI has looked for to demonstrate Musk ´ s early assistance for the concept of making OpenAI a for-profit company so it might raise money for the hardware and computer 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 obstruct it, and the workplace of Delaware's attorney general has said it is examining the conversion.

It was not clear Tuesday when the case might go to trial. Musk's legal representatives initially said they would be all set by June after some back-and-forth with the 2 sides the judge indicated it probably won't be up until June 2026 at the earliest, but likely early 2027.

O'Brien reported from Providence, Rhode Island.

-------