News
Tesla FSD’s prolonged release doesn’t make it a ‘fraud,’ company says
Tesla Full Self-Driving’s prolonged release doesn’t make it a “fraud,” the company said in a motion to dismiss a case.
Tesla is currently involved in a class-action lawsuit from a few Autopilot and Full Self-Driving customers and has recently filed a motion to dismiss the case with the U.S. District Court in San Francisco. In that motion, a statement was made by Tesla’s attorneys that may have been taken out of context by some media reports.
Teslarati obtained a copy of the motion, and here is what we found.
After some background information on FSD, Tesla noted that each of the plaintiffs purchased a vehicle, and “all but one allegedly purchase the FSDC package.” (FSDC is an acronym for full self-driving capability.)
“Plaintiffs knew at the time of purchase that their cars were not completely autonomous. And they knew that the timeline towards more complete autonomy was contingent upon numerous factors, including software development and regulatory approval. Yet now they sue Tesla, complaining that their cars are not completely autonomous.”
The document noted that four out of five of the named plaintiffs have valid arbitration agreements with Tesla that should be enforced and cover all of their claims. The one plaintiff who opted out “advanced a consolidated complaint riddled with defects, and that should be dismissed.”
The plaintiff “sued too late–five years after he purchased his vehicle and the optional software package, well after any of his claims accrued. All of his claims are time-barred and should be dismissed. Moreover, the hundreds-of-paragraph, narrative complaint fails to support a single cognizable legal theory. The Complaint makes no mention of the parties’ written contract or Tesla’s car warranty. It instead cherry-picks numerous statements allegedly made by Tesla and attempts to manufacture claims for fraud and breach of warranty.”
Tesla’s attorneys made several statements, including that headline-worthy one regarding FSD and failure. However, the attorneys never claimed that FSD is a failure. In the document, the attorneys pointed out that the complaint “identifies no statement that Tesla made that was fraudulent.”
Additionally, it added that no there was no statement made that Tesla’s vehicles, including those equipped with the FSDC package, were fully autonomous at the time of the Plaintiff’s purchase. Tesla’s website also made it very clear that those vehicles were not.
Tesla’s attorneys noted that the plaintiff allegedly researched Tesla’s online and public statements and reviewed them before buying his vehicles. The labels of “Autopilot,” “Enhanced Autopilot,” or “Full Self-Driving Capability” didn’t mean that the vehicles were fully autonomous. Tesla’s attorneys also noted that Tesla’s user manuals plainly showed this as well.
“Nor would any reasonable consumer purchase a Tesla vehicle with the belief that it is fully autonomous based solely on these labels,” the attorneys said.
Instead, each of the plaintiffs alleged that they “decided to purchase [his or her] vehicle and the ADAS packages after researching, reviewing, and relying on Tesla’s online and other public statements.”
The plaintiff’s “assertion that Tesla promised the vehicles were already fully autonomous when they were sold rings hollow,” the attorneys stated.
“His assertion that Tesla promised to release completely autonomous capabilities ‘within a reasonable time after,’ his purchase fares no better.”
“No allegations show that Tesla promised that the FSDC package would enable full autonomy within a specified period of time. Many of the statements quoted in the Complaint did not even concern the FSDC package,” the attorneys said, adding that this makes it irrelevant to the plaintiff’s claims.
“In addition, the quoted statements were also often accompanied by and subject to the qualifier that a release of fully autonomous capabilities to the general public would require government approval, a variable over which Tesla had no control, and that any regulatory clearance would require a vast amount of data to show that completely autonomous driving is significantly safer than human driving.”
The attorneys cited another federal court that said similar statements “do not constitute fraud” because they indicate that Tesla wasn’t making the absolute representation the Plaintiff said he was.
“Same here. Especially under the heightened Rule 9(b) standard, no allegation suggests that the aspirational statements that Tesla did make were, somehow, false when made. See Richardson, 2000 WL.”
“To the contrary, allegations in the Complaint demonstrate that Tesla has been constantly improving its ADAS technology by releasing software updates, with a goal of achieving more and better autonomy capabilities in the future.”
“Mere failure to realize a long-term, aspirational goal is not fraud.“
In reference to the above statement, the attorneys pointed out that the courts often rejected the argument that a plaintiff can prove the fraudulent intent by pointing to Tesla’s “subsequent failure to perform under the agreement.”
Since launching the software in 2015, Tesla has made a lot of progress toward FSD and autonomous. Tesla has had two AI Day events explaining the technology being developed and used. And Tesla has since launched an FSD Beta testing program, and you can read the recent Tesla FSD Beta news here.
Disclosure: Johnna is a $TSLA shareholder and believes in Tesla’s mission.
Your feedback is welcome. If you have any comments or concerns or see a typo, you can email me at johnna@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter at @JohnnaCrider1.
Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. Teslarati is now on TikTok. Follow us for interactive news & more. You can also follow Teslarati on LinkedIn, Twitter, Instagram, and Facebook.
Tesla has trimmed its Model Y offerings as its Standard All-Wheel-Drive configuration has been removed from the online configurator after roughly nine months on sale. The move follows the removal of the Cybertruck, as its trims have also been minimized as that vehicle heads for total discontinuation at the end of Summer 2027.
Launched in February 2026 as a mid-tier dual-motor option between the Rear-Wheel-Drive model and the Premium trims, the Standard All-Wheel-Drive Model Y offered 294 miles of range and a 4.6-second 0-60 mph time in a stripped-down package.
🚨 Tesla has pulled the $41,990 Model Y AWD from its U.S. configurator after nine months on sale.
The cheapest AWD Model Y you can order is now the $49,990 Premium AWD, with Premium deliveries quoted for Jan–Mar 2027.
The $39,990 RWD stays, and AWD units remain in inventory. https://t.co/uROJp2lVpx
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 13, 2026
With it gone, the cheapest new AWD Model Y buyers can configure is now the Premium AWD at $49,990, with estimated deliveries pushed into January–March 2027. The $39,990 rear-wheel-drive Model Y remains available for custom orders, and some AWD units are still listed in inventory.
The move arrives days after Tesla sharply narrowed its Cybertruck lineup. New orders for the Dual Motor AWD and Premium AWD versions have been disabled, leaving only the high-performance Cyberbeast—priced around $109,990 before fees—as the sole configurable option.
Elon Musk has stated that Cybertruck production at Gigafactory Texas will wind down around the middle to late summer of 2027 to free manufacturing space for greater Cybercab output. Tesla has raised prices on remaining trims and is prioritizing higher-margin builds while working through an existing order backlog that exceeds what the line can complete before conversion.
These parallel decisions reflect a broader effort to simplify Tesla’s retail customer lineup. Lower-volume or lower-margin variants are being phased out or deprioritized in favor of core, higher-spec models that generate stronger profitability and clearer production planning.
For the Model Y, this concentrates volume on the remaining RWD and Premium configurations while Premium deliveries already stretch into 2027. For the Cybertruck, it accelerates the transition away from a stainless-steel pickup that underperformed relative to initial volume expectations.
Tesla Model Y Standard Full Review: Is it worth the lower price?
The freed capacity and reduced complexity directly support Cybercab scaling. Tesla began pilot Cybercab production at Giga Texas in early 2026, launched paid autonomous rides in Austin in September, and is preparing for substantial volume growth.
By streamlining the existing vehicle portfolio, the company is reallocating factory space, engineering attention, and supply-chain resources toward its purpose-built Robotaxi, which lacks a steering wheel or pedals and is designed exclusively for unsupervised autonomy.
The result is a leaner retail lineup today and a clearer path to high-volume Cybercab deployment tomorrow.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship is going for a catch that could change spaceflight forever
SpaceX will try to catch both Starship stages today, a first for any orbital rocket.
SpaceX is set to launch Starship Flight 15 from Starbase on Friday afternoon, and if both stages make it back to the tower, the mission will go down as the first time an orbital rocket has ever been fully recovered. The 75 minute launch window opens at 4:45 p.m. CT from Pad 2, a day after SpaceX rolled Ship 42 out to the pad and shared photos of the move on X.
The first catch comes quickly. About six and a half minutes after liftoff, Booster 22 is scheduled to fly back to Starbase and settle into the launch tower’s chopstick arms, the first catch attempt for SpaceX’s V3 Super Heavy. SpaceX has caught the booster three times before most recently in March 2025.
Ship 42 moves to the Starbase pad ahead of launch https://t.co/pMUFTHneJQ — SpaceX (@SpaceX) November 13, 2026
The second catch is the one that has never been done. Ship 42 will climb to an orbit about 275 kilometers up, deploy 26 Starlink V3 satellites and complete about 14 orbits. Three of those satellites carry cameras to inspect the ship’s heat shield before it commits to coming home. If its reentry, landing burn and tower approach systems pass their checks, the ship will fire its engines to leave orbit, fall through the atmosphere in its belly flop position, flip vertical and drop into the tower about 22 and a half hours after launch, on Saturday afternoon. SpaceX gave a preview of that maneuver in an animation during its third quarter earnings webcast.
Elon Musk described a successful double catch on that call as “the first time that an orbital launch vehicle has been fully recovered” and a “profound technology milestone,” putting the odds of catching the ship at “more likely than not.” SpaceX has called it a potential “breakthrough moment in making Starship a reliable, rapidly reusable rocket,”
Reuse is where the economics change. Falcon 9 lands its boosters routinely, but its upper stage is thrown away on every flight. Starship is designed so both stages can be refueled and flown again, which is key to cutting launch costs. That matters for Starlink, where each V3 satellite is expected to carry roughly 10 times the download capacity of the V2 Mini satellites flying today, and for Starmind, SpaceX’s planned constellation of AI compute satellites.
It matters for NASA too. Starship is the lunar lander for the Artemis program, and reaching the Moon requires refilling a ship in orbit using several tanker flights. That plan only works if Starships can fly again and again. Musk has said he expects Starship to reach a weekly launch cadence in the first half of 2027.
Investors are paying attention. Morgan Stanley’s Adam Jonas wrote this week that a catch of both stages would likely be “a material positive” for SpaceX stock.
The last Starship flight in September reached orbit for the first time but ended after about three hours with a splashdown in the Pacific, short of its planned 10 hours, after some engines shut down. Since then, Booster 22 has completed a full 33 engine static fire and Ship 42 a six engine firing, as Teslarati previously reported. As of Friday morning, SpaceX was still waiting on the FAA to approve a license change covering the ship’s return over land.
Elon Musk
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks hit a new stage, and one hurdle remains
Tesla and SpaceX merger talks are reportedly advancing, and a deal could arrive by December.
Tesla and SpaceX are moving closer to a combination, with a deal announcement possible as soon as December, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The companies have also discussed a scenario in which the announcement slips into early 2027.
Boards and advisers on both sides are now working through the terms of the deal and the governance structure of the combined company, according to the report. One open item is how many SpaceX shares Tesla investors would receive. Bloomberg had previously reported that the two companies were aiming to announce a deal in the first half of next year and close it before the end of President Donald Trump’s term, so a December announcement would pull that schedule forward by months.
Tesla shares rose as much as 1.9% to $398.35 after the report, while SpaceX gained 0.6% to $140.63. SpaceX carries a market value of about $1.9 trillion following its June IPO, and Tesla is valued at about $1.55 trillion, which would make a combination the largest corporate deal on record. Neither company responded to requests for comment.
The talks became official on October 20, when Elon Musk said on SpaceX’s third quarter earnings call that both companies had formed special committees of independent directors to study a merger, as Teslarati reported. Musk said he could not take part because he is “a conflicted party” and called the process “an odd kabuki dance.” He also noted that Tesla would need approval from 50 percent of all outstanding shares, a bar the company missed in 2025 when a board declassification proposal won support from only 39.4 percent.
China remains the biggest structural problem. Bloomberg’s sources said the companies still need to work out how to isolate Tesla’s large and profitable manufacturing business in China from SpaceX’s U.S. government and defense contracts. JPMorgan analyst Rajat Gupta described those two factors last month as “key dynamics that are at odds with each other” for regulatory and shareholder approval. Musk has repeatedly said Tesla has no plans to separate its China business, a position he restated in August after ARK Invest predicted a merger announcement before the end of the year.
Washington adds another layer. Democrats took control of Congress in this month’s midterms and have pledged to investigate Musk’s business and political activities, which could bring added scrutiny to a deal involving one of the Pentagon’s most important launch and satellite contractors.
The report also lands three weeks before Tesla’s December 3 annual meeting at Giga Texas. That ballot has only three items, led by the re-election of Musk, board chair Robyn Denholm and JB Straubel, and includes no merger proposal. Any deal announced in December would likely require a separate special meeting for Tesla shareholders to vote on it.
The two companies already share a growing list of projects, including the Terafab semiconductor plant in Texas. Tesla’s next generation Roadster, which uses cold gas thrusters built on SpaceX hardware, turned up on display at SpaceX headquarters last month and has become one of the clearest public examples of that overlap.
Tesla trims Model Y offerings as All-Wheel-Drive gets the axe
SpaceX Starship is going for a catch that could change spaceflight forever
