Connect with us

News

Tesla Model 3 production lawsuit definitively dumped in appeals court

(Photo: Andres GE)

Published

on

A panel of three judges from the 9th Circuit appeals court has definitively tossed a bid from Tesla investors Kurt Friedman and Uppili Srinivasan to revive their second amended proposed class-action lawsuit against the electric car maker. Friedman and Srinivasan filed a securities fraud lawsuit against Tesla over the company’s alleged misstatements in 2017 about the company’s production timeline for the Model 3 sedan. 

According to the plaintiffs, Tesla CEO Elon Musk and former Chief Financial Officer Deepak Ahuja maintained their stance that the company’s Model 3 production facilities were “on track” to meet its self-imposed target of manufacturing 5,000 Model 3 per week by the end of 2017, despite the fact that the company was experiencing “production hell.” Tesla’s failure to reach its 5,000 per week Model 3 production goal resulted in a 6.8% slide in TSLA stock. 

As per U.S. Circuit Judge Daniel P. Collins, however, Tesla’s goal to produce 5,000 Model 3 per week is an unquestionable “forward-looking statement.” The Ninth Circuit explained that Tesla’s statements were neither false nor misleading, and they came with ample cautionary language as well. This meant that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act’s safe harbor shields the EV maker from liability, as per a report from Law360

“Tesla’s goal to produce 5,000 vehicles per week is unquestionably a ‘forward-looking statement’ because it is a ‘plan’ or ‘objective of management for future operations,’ and this plan or objective ‘relat[es] to the products’ of Tesla. Contrary to what plaintiffs contend, Tesla’s various statements that it was ‘on track’ to achieve this goal and that ‘there are no issues’ that ‘would prevent’ Tesla from achieving the goal are likewise forward-looking statements,” Judge Collins wrote. 

Advertisement

“We reiterate that it is not enough to plead that a challenged statement rests on subsidiary premises about how various future events will play out over the timeframe defined by the forward-looking statement. This reasoning precludes plaintiffs’ theory that Tesla’s year-end goal rested on scheduling assumptions that Tesla knew it was unlikely to meet. Any such schedule about how future production would play out on the way toward the announced goal is simply a set of the ‘assumptions’ about future events on which that goal is based. Like the goal itself, such projected timelines are forward-looking statements,” the panel explained further. 

The dismissal from the 9th Circuit appeals court comes as the latest blow to the plaintiffs, who also suffered a dismissal from U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer of the Northern District of California in 2019. Judge Breyer’s decision then also cited Tesla’s “repeated warnings about Model 3 production risks,” as well as Elon Musk’s personal references to “production hell,” as indications that Tesla provided ample warning to investors about its manufacturing challenges for the Model 3. The lawsuit’s 2019 shutdown from Judge Breyer was ultimately what prompted the 9th Circuit appeal. 

Read the full report on the 9th Circuit’s decision against the Model 3 production lawsuit here

Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Musk bankers looking to trim xAI debt after SpaceX merger: report

xAI has built up $18 billion in debt over the past few years, with some of this being attributed to the purchase of social media platform Twitter (now X) and the creation of the AI development company. A new financing deal would help trim some of the financial burden that is currently present ahead of the plan to take SpaceX public sometime this year.

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk’s bankers are looking to trim the debt that xAI has taken on over the past few years, following the company’s merger with SpaceX, a new report from Bloomberg says.

xAI has built up $18 billion in debt over the past few years, with some of this being attributed to the purchase of social media platform Twitter (now X) and the creation of the AI development company. Bankers are trying to create some kind of financing plan that would trim “some of the heavy interest costs” that come with the debt.

The financing deal would help trim some of the financial burden that is currently present ahead of the plan to take SpaceX public sometime this year. Musk has essentially confirmed that SpaceX would be heading toward an IPO last month.

SpaceX IPO is coming, CEO Elon Musk confirms

The report indicates that Morgan Stanley is expected to take the leading role in any financing plan, citing people familiar with the matter. Morgan Stanley, along with Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, and JPMorgan Chase & Co., are all expected to be in the lineup of banks leading SpaceX’s potential IPO.

Since Musk acquired X, he has also had what Bloomberg says is a “mixed track record with debt markets.” Since purchasing X a few years ago with a $12.5 billion financing package, X pays “tens of millions in interest payments every month.”

That debt is held by Bank of America, Barclays, Mitsubishi, UFJ Financial, BNP Paribas SA, Mizuho, and Société Générale SA.

X merged with xAI last March, which brought the valuation to $45 billion, including the debt.

SpaceX announced the merger with xAI earlier this month, a major move in Musk’s plan to alleviate Earth of necessary data centers and replace them with orbital options that will be lower cost:

“In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. To harness even a millionth of our Sun’s energy would require over a million times more energy than our civilization currently uses! The only logical solution, therefore, is to transport these resource-intensive efforts to a location with vast power and space. I mean, space is called “space” for a reason.”

The merger has many advantages, but one of the most crucial is that it positions the now-merged companies to fund broader goals, fueled by revenue from the Starlink expansion, potential IPO, and AI-driven applications that could accelerate the development of lunar bases.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla pushes Full Self-Driving outright purchasing option back in one market

Tesla announced last month that it would eliminate the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving software outright, instead opting for a subscription-only program, which will require users to pay monthly.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has pushed the opportunity to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright in one market: Australia.

The date remains February 14 in North America, but Tesla has pushed the date back to March 31, 2026, in Australia.

Tesla announced last month that it would eliminate the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving software outright, instead opting for a subscription-only program, which will require users to pay monthly.

If you have already purchased the suite outright, you will not be required to subscribe once again, but once the outright purchase option is gone, drivers will be required to pay the monthly fee.

The reason for the adjustment is likely due to the short period of time the Full Self-Driving suite has been available in the country. In North America, it has been available for years.

Tesla hits major milestone with Full Self-Driving subscriptions

However, Tesla just launched it just last year in Australia.

Full Self-Driving is currently available in seven countries: the United States, Canada, China, Mexico, Australia, New Zealand, and South Korea.

The company has worked extensively for the past few years to launch the suite in Europe. It has not made it quite yet, but Tesla hopes to get it launched by the end of this year.

In North America, Tesla is only giving customers one more day to buy the suite outright before they will be committed to the subscription-based option for good.

The price is expected to go up as the capabilities improve, but there are no indications as to when Tesla will be doing that, nor what type of offering it plans to roll out for owners.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Starlink terminals smuggled into Iran amid protest crackdown: report

Roughly 6,000 units were delivered following January’s unrest.

Published

on

Credit: Starlink/X

The United States quietly moved thousands of Starlink terminals into Iran after authorities imposed internet shutdowns as part of its crackdown on protests, as per information shared by U.S. officials to The Wall Street Journal

Roughly 6,000 units were delivered following January’s unrest, marking the first known instance of Washington directly supplying the satellite systems inside the country.

Iran’s government significantly restricted online access as demonstrations spread across the country earlier this year. In response, the U.S. purchased nearly 7,000 Starlink terminals in recent months, with most acquisitions occurring in January. Officials stated that funding was reallocated from other internet access initiatives to support the satellite deployment.

President Donald Trump was aware of the effort, though it remains unclear whether he personally authorized it. The White House has not issued a comment about the matter publicly.

Possession of a Starlink terminal is illegal under Iranian law and can result in significant prison time. Despite this, the WSJ estimated that tens of thousands of residents still rely on the satellite service to bypass state controls. Authorities have reportedly conducted inspections of private homes and rooftops to locate unauthorized equipment.

Advertisement

Earlier this year, Trump and Elon Musk discussed maintaining Starlink access for Iranians during the unrest. Tehran has repeatedly accused Washington of encouraging dissent, though U.S. officials have mostly denied the allegations.

The decision to prioritize Starlink sparked internal debate within U.S. agencies. Some officials argued that shifting resources away from Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) could weaken broader internet access efforts. VPNs had previously played a major role in keeping Iranians connected during earlier protest waves, though VPNs are not effective when the actual internet gets cut.

According to State Department figures, about 30 million Iranians used U.S.-funded VPN services during demonstrations in 2022. During a near-total blackout in June 2025, roughly one-fifth of users were still able to access limited connectivity through VPN tools.

Critics have argued that satellite access without VPN protection may expose users to geolocation risks. After funds were redirected to acquire Starlink equipment, support reportedly lapsed for two of five VPN providers operating in Iran.

Advertisement

A State Department official has stated that the U.S. continues to back multiple technologies,  including VPNs alongside Starlink, to sustain people’s internet access amidst the government’s shutdowns.

Continue Reading