News
Tesla lawsuit defendant fires lawyers after TSLA short financing is revealed
Tesla’s lawsuit against former employee Martin Tripp has taken an unusual turn.
After publishing a large number of documents and videos online over the last week, including many under a confidentiality order in the case, Tripp has now fired his lawyers and will represent himself moving forward. Notably, this action coincided with the revelation that a TSLA short seller, The Funicular Fund, LP (dba Cable Car Capital LLC), was financing Tripp’s legal defense.
The case has been ongoing since 2018 wherein Tesla filed a complaint alleging that Tripp, a former process technician at Gigafactory 1 in Nevada, had stolen several gigabytes of confidential trade secret information and transferred it to third parties. Tripp denies wrongdoing and claims to be a whistleblower reporting evidence of securities fraud and concerns over safety during early Model 3 manufacturing. He has further filed a counterclaim against Tesla in the case, alleging defamation.
Following a report published by Bloomberg revealing Car Capital’s financial role in the case, Tripp took to Twitter to both double down and explain his actions.

“Why should it be a secret as to who is financing my litigation? …My Attys were certainly secretive, and made it clear that I NOT say a word about it if questioned…,” he wrote. “To be clear…I did NOT accept money to fund my litigation from a ‘short seller.’ I accepted litigation financing from an investor… They DID tell me they short tesla stock (and other stocks if I am not mistaken). But, I don’t give a shit about shorting, whatever the hell it is. I care about, you guessed it…the truth, and being able to fight for it.”
In the documents Tripp published via Google Drive, several letters and two documents titled “Litigation Funding Agreement” revealed that Cable Car Capital had invested $150,000 into Tripp’s defense and another $125,000 was later sought after the first round was near exhaustion. Tesla responded immediately to the revelation and filed an Emergency Motion on Monday demanding Tripp be ordered to stop publishing the information and stop ‘harassing’ the carmaker’s counsel, among other things.
In addition to publishing confidential information, Tripp had also posted a copy of an email from Tesla’s counsel, Jeanine Zalduendo, to his attorneys demanding the cessation of his actions. “No Jeanine, I don’t think I will…,” he wrote on Twitter with an image of the correspondence attached.

The judge in the case, formally Tesla Inc. v. Tripp and assigned number 18-cv-00296 in USDC District of Nevada (Reno), held an emergency court hearing via teleconference the same day of Tesla’s emergency filing. Tripp was ordered to stop publishing and discussing the confidential information and a hearing was scheduled to determine whether he would also be held in contempt of court and face sanctions, according to Bloomberg.
On Tuesday, Tripp’s lawyer filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel with Consent, formally ending the firm’s relationship with the defendant. “On August 7, 2020, undersigned counsel received notice via an e-mail sent from Mr. Tripp’s e-mail address that he wished to terminate the attorney-client relationship and represent himself,” the document stated. The former Tesla employee also posted several videos on YouTube detailing his actions and decision.
Throughout his numerous Twitter discussion threads on the matter in the hours since learning about Tesla’s Emergency Motion, Tripp has continued to discuss the original confidential information in depth. Part of the communications has detailed how difficult it was to obtain legal funding to counter the lawsuit originally. Tripp has also set up a GoFundMe account to assist with both legal expenses and his cost of living in Hungary, where he currently resides.
Tesla’s Emergency Motion can be read below.
Tesla v Tripp – Tesla Emerg… by DJ Ferris on Scribd
News
GM takes latest step to avoid disaster as EV efforts get derailed
There was an even larger step taken this morning, as the Detroit Free Press reported that GM was idling its Factory Zero plant in Michigan until late November, placing about 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff status.
General Motors has taken its latest step to avoid financial disaster as its electric vehicle efforts have been widely derailed.
GM’s electric vehicle manufacturing efforts started off hot, and CEO Mary Barra seemed to have a real hold on how the industry and consumers were starting to evolve toward sustainable powertrains. Even former President Joe Biden commended her as being a major force in the global transition to EVs.
However, the company’s plans have not gone as they’ve drawn them up. GM has reported some underwhelming delivery figures in recent quarters, and with the loss of the $7,500 tax credit, the company is planning for what is likely a substantial setback in its entire EV division.
Earlier this month, the company reported it would include a $1.6 billion charge in its quarterly earnings results from EV investments. It was the first true sign that things with GM’s EV projects were going to slow down.
There was an even larger step taken this morning, as the Detroit Free Press reported that GM was idling its Factory Zero plant in Michigan until late November, placing about 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff status.
This is in addition to the 280 employees it has already laid off after production cuts that happened earlier this year at the Detroit-Hamtramck plant.
After November 24, GM will bring back 3,200 people to work until January 5 to operate both shifts. On January 5, GM is expected to keep 1,200 workers on indefinite layoff.
GM is not the only legacy automaker to make a move like this, as Ford has also started to make a move that reflects a cautious tone regarding how far and how committed it can be to its EV efforts.
After the tax credit was lost, it seemed to be a game of who would be able to float their efforts longest without the government’s help. Tesla CEO Elon Musk long said that the loss of these subsidies would help the company and hurt its competitors, and so far, that is what we are seeing.
Elon Musk was right all along about Tesla’s rivals and EV subsidies
However, Tesla still has some things to figure out, including how its delivery numbers will be without the tax credit. Its best quarter came in Q3 as the credit was expiring, but Tesla did roll out some more affordable models after the turn of the quarter.
News
Tesla expands Robotaxi geofence, but not the garage
This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.
Tesla has expanded its Robotaxi geofence four times, once as recently as this week.
However, the company has seemingly kept its fleet size relatively small compared to the size of the service area, making some people — even pro-Tesla influencers — ask for more transparency and an expansion of the number of vehicles it has operating.
Over the past four months, Tesla has done an excellent job of maintaining growth with its service area in Austin as it continues to roll out the early stages of what is the Robotaxi platform.
The most recent expansion brought its size from 170 square miles (440.298 sq. km) to 243 square miles (629.367 sq. km).
Tesla sends clear message to Waymo with latest Austin Robotaxi move
This has broadened its geofence to nearly three times the size of Waymo’s current service area, which is great from a comparative standpoint. However, there seems to be something that also needs to be expanded as the geofence gets larger: the size of the Robotaxi fleet.
Tesla has never revealed exactly how many Model Y vehicles it is using in Austin for its partially driverless ride-hailing service (We say partial because the Safety Monitor moves to the driver’s seat for freeway routes).
When it first launched Robotaxi, Tesla said it would be a small fleet size, between 10 and 20 vehicles. In late August, after its second expansion of the service area, it then said it “also increased the number of cars available by 50 percent.”
The problem is, nobody knows how many cars were in the fleet to begin with, so there’s no real concrete figure on how many Robotaxis were available.
This has caused some frustration for users, who have talked about the inability to get rides smoothly. As the geofence has gotten larger, there has only been one mentioned increase in the fleet.
Trying to book a RoboTaxi in the new geofence and can’t get paired with a car.
Really think Tesla needs to add more cars to the fleet in Austin. Has become tougher and tougher to use the service reliably @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/KHqea3oUxU
— Farzad (@farzyness) October 29, 2025
Tesla did not reveal any new figures or expansion plans in terms of fleet size in the recent Q3 Earnings Call, but there is still a true frustration among many because the company will not reveal an exact figure.
News
Tesla recalls 6,197 Cybertrucks for light bar adhesive issue
On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.
Tesla has recalled 6,197 Cybertrucks for a light bar adhesive issue that was utilized by Service to install the aftermarket part.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), impacted vehicles may have had the light bar “inadvertently attached to the windshield using the incorrect surface primer.”
Tesla identified an issue with the light bar’s adhesion to glass back in February and worked for months to find a solution. In October, the company performed chemical testing as a part of an engineering study and determined the root cause as the BetaPrime primer it utilized, figuring out that it was not the right surface priming material to use for this specific application.
On October 20, Tesla issued a voluntary recall of the impacted vehicles and has identified 619 warranty claims and just a single field report that is related to the issue.
The component is manufactured by a Romanian company called Hella Romania S.R.L., but the issue is not the primer’s quality. Instead, it is simply the fact that it is not the correct adhesive for this specific type of application.
Tesla says there are no reports of injuries or deaths due to this issue, and it will be resolved. In the 473 report that the NHTSA released this morning, Tesla said:
“At no charge to customers, Tesla will inspect the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory for delamination or damage and if either is present, replace the light bar with a new light bar adhered with tape and a positive mechanical attachment. If no delamination or damage is present, Tesla will retrofit the service-installed optional off-road light bar accessory with a positive mechanical attachment.”
This is the third recall applied to Cybertrucks this year, as one on March 18 highlighted the potential for exterior trim panels to detach while driving, and another earlier this month when the NHTSA said its front parking lights were too bright.
Tesla resolved the first with a free assembly replacement, while the headlight issue was fixed with an Over-the-Air software update earlier this week. Owners said there was a noticeable difference in the brightness of the lights now compared to previously.
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoSpaceX posts Starship booster feat that’s so nutty, it doesn’t even look real
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla Full Self-Driving gets an offer to be insured for ‘almost free’
-
News2 weeks agoElon Musk confirms Tesla FSD V14.2 will see widespread rollout
-
News2 weeks agoTesla is adding an interesting feature to its centerscreen in a coming update
-
News2 weeks agoTesla widens rollout of new Full Self-Driving suite to more owners
-
Elon Musk2 weeks agoTesla CEO Elon Musk’s $1 trillion pay package hits first adversity from proxy firm
-
News2 weeks agoTesla might be doing away with a long-included feature with its vehicles
-
News1 week agoTesla updates fans on its plans for the Roadster

