Musk v. Altman Jurors ‘Rose Up to the Plate,’ Judge Seats Nine

Nine jurors were seated Monday in the AI industry’s closely watched trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI chief Sam Altman from a pool of San Francisco Bay Area residents who are expected to hear three weeks of testimony in federal court.

The jury selection process started with a pool of 40 prospective jurors that was whittled down over five hours of close questioning by US District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers and attorneys for both parties. Altman and his co-defendant, OpenAI President Greg Brockman, attended the selection process, an unusual move for well-known tech executives who rarely make courtroom appearances unless required to testify.

Altman Versus Musk: How the Biggest Feud in Tech Landed in Court

Though pulling a panel of jurors who promised to be fair to both Musk and Altman seemed like it would be a difficult task, only juror one said he couldn’t put aside his feelings about Musk, specifically. Others said under questioning that they could isolate their personal beliefs from the trial.

Gonzalez Rogers, a veteran of big-name Silicon Valley trials, dismissed that juror “for cause” but denied other requests by Musk and Altman’s legal teams to strike jurors for personal biases. The judge said she was convinced the prospective jurors showed great respect for the judicial process and appeared willing to put aside their biases.

“The reality is that people don’t like him,” Gonzalez Rogers said of Musk, noting also that many don’t like Altman either. “Every one of these individuals who I questioned rose up to the plate.”

Read More: Musk v. Altman Case Will Test Jury Process for Rich and Famous

People wait to enter the US District Court in Oakland, California, on April 27.

Photographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg

But outside the courtroom, tensions were higher.

Musk wasn’t present, but he threw jabs at Altman and Brockman on his social media platform X Monday morning: “Scam Altman and Greg Stockman stole a charity. Full stop,” he wrote in one post.

Musk also appeared to amplify an April 6 post from Ronan Farrow about The New Yorker reporter’s lengthy investigation into Altman, by featuring it in many users’ feeds on the platform.

And about 25 protesters appeared outside the Oakland courthouse, some from a group called Tesla Takedown that has overseen demonstrations against Musk across the country and others from Quit GPT, the group that’s been protesting at OpenAI’s offices. The Monday protest targeted both Musk and Altman, with organizers titling the event “Everyone Sucks Here.”

‘Advisory’ Verdict

The jury will hear from a parade of VIP witnesses and will be asked to wade through years-old emails, text messages and corporate documents from OpenAI’s founders to determine whether Altman and Brockman betrayed Musk and the company’s founding principles by converting to a for-profit and taking billions in investment from Microsoft Corp. But the jury’s verdict on liability will ultimately be “advisory,” meaning Gonzalez Rogers will have the final say on the matter.

Prospective jurors voiced mostly negative or neutral opinions about the feuding AI titans, with a number of jurors expressing special acrimony toward Musk for his work on the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency.

Read More: Musk and Altman Head to Trial in Feud Over Future of OpenAI

The group had mixed views about AI technology. One man, an insurance underwriter and recent college graduate, said he had begun using ChatGPT instead of Google for general search inquires, and another woman, a research biologist, said she uses AI to write code and craft emails.

Others said they had concerns the technology would cause mass job displacement. One nurse said AI has increased her workload because she has had to double check its work when it reviews medical records. Another man said he was worried about the current pace of AI advancement and questioned the motives of the industry broadly.

Each party used their five strikes that allowed them to eliminate jurors without needing to provide a specific reason.

OpenAI’s attorney William Savitt told reporters outside the courthouse that he believes it’s a fair jury that “will do what they’re supposed to do and put any preconceptions aside.” Musk’s attorneys didn’t comment when exiting the courthouse.

The case is Musk v. Altman, 4:24-cv-04722, US District Court, Northern District of California (Oakland).

--With assistance from Rachel Metz.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Isaiah Poritz in San Francisco at iporitz@bloomberg.net

To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Stephanie Gleason at saerts1@bloomberg.net

Peter Blumberg

© 2026 Bloomberg L.P. All rights reserved. Used with permission.