Connect with us
tesla fremont factory tesla fremont factory

News

Tesla’s $137M verdict in racism case is “extremely high” says judge: Report

(Credit: Tesla)

Published

on

U.S. District Judge William Orrick stated he was inclined to deny Tesla’s request for a new trial on the racism case brought against it by ex-employee Owen Diaz if the former Tesla worker agrees to a reduction in damages, reported Bloomberg. Judge Orrick said he would issue a written ruling but did not give a specific time frame.

On Wednesday, January 19, U.S. District Judge William Orrick presided over a hearing about Tesla’s request for a new trial on the racism case. However, Judge Orrick shared that he was “troubled” by the $6.9 million jurors awarded Diaz for emotional distress damages. He noted that the $6.9 million award “may be untethered to the distress to which Mr. Diaz and his witnesses testified,” adding that punitive damages almost 20 times that amount was “extremely high.”

Tesla’s $137 million verdict is believed to be one of the largest in U.S. history for an individual plaintiff in a racial discrimination case. For perspective, in 2000, Coca-Cola Company agreed to pay more than $190 million to settle a racial discrimination lawsuit filed by black employees in April 1999. It was one of the largest settlements at the time. The settlement went to as many as 2,000 current, and former black salaried Coca-Cola employees, reported the New York Times.

Although he believes Tesla’s $137 million verdict may be too high, Judge Orrick showed he understood the jurors’ decision. 

“That said, I recognize the awful history of race discrimination in this country. Particularly juxtaposed with working at a company that attempted to present itself as a modern, green, disruptive company that pitched itself as a good place to work, would naturally exacerbate the distress that Mr. Diaz felt,” Orrick said.

Advertisement
-->

Diaz’s attorney, Michael Rubin, tried to argue that the jury’s award was not based on passion or prejudice but rather evidence. He also noted that the jury verdict was within constitutional limits and tried to convince Judge Orrick to leave the verdict intact.

Kathleen Sullivan, Tesla’s attorney, tried to convince the judge that compensatory damages should be as low as $300,000 and punitive damages should be less than four times that amount. Sullivan based her arguments on similar cases. She added that Tesla took steps to discipline the employees Diaz had complained about. However, Sullivan also acknowledged that Tesla could have done more. 

The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, reach out to me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.

Maria--aka "M"-- is an experienced writer and book editor. She's written about several topics including health, tech, and politics. As a book editor, she's worked with authors who write Sci-Fi, Romance, and Dark Fantasy. M loves hearing from TESLARATI readers. If you have any tips or article ideas, contact her at maria@teslarati.com or via X, @Writer_01001101.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s lawsuit against OpenAI and Microsoft is heading to jury trial

The ruling keeps alive claims that OpenAI misled the Tesla CEO about its charitable purpose while accepting billions of dollars in funding.

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

OpenAI Inc. and Microsoft will face a jury trial this spring after a federal judge rejected their efforts to dismiss Elon Musk’s lawsuit, which accuses the artificial intelligence startup of abandoning its original nonprofit mission. The ruling keeps alive claims that OpenAI misled the Tesla CEO about its charitable purpose while accepting billions of dollars in funding.

As noted in a report from Bloomberg News, a federal judge in Oakland, California, ruled that OpenAI Inc. and Microsoft failed to show that Musk’s claims should be dismissed. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated that while the evidence remains unclear, Musk has maintained that OpenAI “had a specific charitable purpose and that he attached two fundamental terms to it: that OpenAI be open source and that it would remain a nonprofit — purposes consistent with OpenAI’s charter and mission.”

Judge Gonzalez Rogers also rejected an argument by OpenAI suggesting that Musk’s use of an intermediary to donate $38 million in seed money to the company stripped him of legal standing. “Holding otherwise would significantly reduce the enforcement of a large swath of charitable trusts, contrary to the modern trend,” Judge Gonzalez Rogers wrote.

The judge also declined to dismiss Musk’s fraud allegations, citing internal OpenAI communications from 2017 involving co-founder Greg Brockman. In an email cited by the judge, fellow OpenAI board member Shivon Zilis informed Musk that Brockman would “like to continue with the non-profit structure.”

Advertisement
-->

Just two months later, however, Brockman wrote in a private note that he “cannot say that we are committed to the non-profit. don’t want to say that we’re committed. if three months later we’re doing b-corp then it was a lie.”

Marc Toberoff, a member of Musk’s legal team, said Judge Gonzalez Rogers’s ruling confirms that “there is substantial evidence that OpenAI’s leadership made knowingly false assurances to Mr. Musk about its charitable mission that they never honored in favor of their personal self-enrichment.”

OpenAI, for its part, maintained that Musk’s legal efforts are baseless. In a statement, the AI startup said it is looking forward to the upcoming trial. “Mr. Musk’s lawsuit continues to be baseless and a part of his ongoing pattern of harassment, and we look forward to demonstrating this at trial. We remain focused on empowering the OpenAI Foundation, which is already one of the best-resourced nonprofits ever,” OpenAI stated.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla arsonist who burned Cybertruck sees end of FAFO journey

The man has now reached the “Find Out” stage.

Published

on

Credit: U.S. Attorney’s Office, District of Arizona

A Mesa, Arizona man has been sentenced to five years in federal prison for setting fire to a Tesla location and vehicle in a politically motivated arson attack, federal prosecutors have stated. 

The April 2025 incident destroyed a Tesla Cybertruck, endangered first responders, and triggered mandatory sentencing under federal arson laws.

A five-year sentence

U.S. District Judge Diane J. Humetewa sentenced Ian William Moses, 35, of Mesa, Arizona, to 5 years in prison followed by 3 years of supervised release for maliciously damaging property and vehicles by means of fire. Moses pleaded guilty in October to all five counts brought by a federal grand jury. Restitution will be determined at a hearing scheduled for April 13, 2026.

As per court records, surveillance footage showed Moses arriving at a Tesla store in Mesa shortly before 2 a.m. on April 28, 2025, carrying a gasoline can and backpack. Investigators stated that he placed fire starter logs near the building, poured gasoline on the structure and three vehicles, and ignited the fire. The blaze destroyed a Tesla Cybertruck. Moses fled the scene on a bicycle and was arrested by Mesa police about a quarter mile away, roughly an hour later.

Advertisement
-->

Authorities said Moses was still wearing the same clothing seen on camera at the time of his arrest and was carrying a hand-drawn map marking the dealership’s location. Moses also painted the word “Theif” on the walls of the Tesla location, prompting jokes from social media users and Tesla community members. 

The “Finding Out” stage

U.S. Attorney Timothy Courchaine noted that Moses’ sentence reflects the gravity of his crime. He also highlighted that arson is never acceptable. 

“Arson can never be an acceptable part of American politics. Mr. Moses’ actions endangered the public and first responders and could have easily turned deadly. This five-year sentence reflects the gravity of these crimes and makes clear that politically fueled attacks on Arizona’s communities and businesses will be met with full accountability.”

Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell echoed the same sentiments, stating that regardless of Moses’ sentiments towards Elon Musk, his actions are not defensible. 

“This sentence sends a clear message: violence and intimidation have no place in our community. Setting fire to a business in retaliation for political or personal grievances is not protest, it is a crime. Our community deserves to feel safe, and this sentence underscores that Maricopa County will not tolerate political violence in any form.”

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

News

Tesla says its Texas lithium refinery is now operational and unlike anything in North America

Elon Musk separately described the site as both the most advanced and the largest lithium refinery in the United States.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla/YouTube

Tesla has confirmed that its Texas lithium refinery is now operational, marking a major milestone for the company’s U.S. battery supply chain. In a newly released video, Tesla staff detailed how the facility converts raw spodumene ore directly into battery-grade lithium hydroxide, making it the first refinery of its kind in North America.

Elon Musk separately described the site as both the most advanced and the largest lithium refinery in the United States.

A first-of-its-kind lithium refining process

In the video, Tesla staff at the Texas lithium refinery near Corpus Christi explained that the facility processes spodumene, a lithium-rich hard-rock ore, directly into battery-grade lithium hydroxide on site. The approach bypasses intermediate refining steps commonly used elsewhere in the industry.

According to the staff, spodumene is processed through kilns and cooling systems before undergoing alkaline leaching, purification, and crystallization. The resulting lithium hydroxide is suitable for use in batteries for energy storage and electric vehicles. Tesla employees noted that the process is simpler and less expensive than traditional refining methods.

Staff at the facility added that the process eliminates hazardous byproducts typically associated with lithium refining. “Our process is more sustainable than traditional methods and eliminates hazardous byproducts, and instead produces a co-product named anhydrite, used in concrete mixes,” an employee noted. 

Advertisement
-->

Musk calls the facility the largest lithium refinery in America

The refinery’s development timeline has been very impressive. The project moved from breaking ground in 2023 to integrated plant startup in 2025 by running feasibility studies, design, and construction in parallel. This compressed schedule enabled the fastest time-to-market for a refinery using this type of technology. This 2026, the facility has become operational. 

Elon Musk echoed the significance of the project in posts on X, stating that “the largest Lithium refinery in America is now operational.” In a separate comment, Musk described the site as “the most advanced lithium refinery in the world” and emphasized that the facility is “very clean.”

By bringing large-scale lithium hydroxide production online in Texas, Tesla is positioning itself to reduce reliance on foreign refining capacity while supporting its growth in battery and vehicle production. The refinery also complements Tesla’s nascent domestic battery manufacturing efforts, which could very well be a difference maker in the market.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading