Three Tesla owners have sued the automaker in a class action lawsuit that was filed on August 2, 2023, after a report from Reuters last week claims the company “exaggerates” its range ratings.
Teslarati examined the complaint, and we are here to give you a breakdown of what the suit says and what the three plaintiffs are suing Tesla for.
The Plaintiffs
Tesla is being sued by James Porter, Bryan Perez, and Dro Esraeili Estepanian, who state in their complaint against the automaker that their action “arises out of Tesla’s false advertising of its electric vehicles’ range, which Tesla grossly overvalued when selling the vehicles to consumers.”
According to the complaint, Porter owns a Model Y Performance and noticed a discrepancy in his vehicle’s range was compared to what it told him:
“After taking delivery of his Tesla vehicle in June 2022, Plaintiff Porter fully charged his vehicle to 100% battery charge and took a 2-hour trip to visit family, approximately 92 miles away. When he arrived at his destination, Plaintiff Porter noticed that the vehicle was left with approximately 40% charge.”
Perez owns a Model 3 Long Range, and the complaint states he had the same issue:
“After receiving his Tesla vehicle, Plaintiff Perez fully charged his vehicle to 100% battery charge and took an approximately 90-mile trip to visit his parents. After returning home from the approximately 180-mile round trip, he noticed that his vehicle showed that it had roughly 10-15% charge remaining.”
Estepanian also has a Model 3 Long Range, and the complaint describes a similar situation:
“Plaintiff Estepanian travels 140 to 150 miles round trip for his daily commute, and he routinely charges his vehicle to 90% battery charge (which equates to approximately 299 miles), per Tesla’s recommendation. Based on a 90% battery charge (and 299-mile starting range), he typically returns from his approximately 150-mile round trip each day and his Tesla vehicle’s screen displays that approximately 100 to 110 miles of range remain, which equates to roughly 33% battery charge remaining. Thus, Plaintiff Estepanian’s electric vehicle consistently loses approximately 189 miles of range during his daily commute—despite only driving approximately 140 to 150 miles round trip each day.”
The Plaintiffs’ Claims
The plaintiffs state that range is a key feature of electric vehicles and is “one of the most important features that consumers generally consider when purchasing an EV, because it correlates to the distance they can travel before needing to recharge the vehicle.”
Throughout the suit, the complaint shows images of Tesla’s website, highlighting range ratings and other “key features,” including top speed and acceleration.
They also include other pieces of evidence that seem to indicate Tesla has exaggerated range estimates.
One part of the complaint states:
“Tesla’s tactics to inflate the range estimates for its vehicles has continued. Recently, South Korean regulators fined Tesla for false advertising the ranges of its vehicles. Specifically, the Korea Fair Trade Commission found that Tesla exaggerated the “driving ranges of its cars on a single charge, their fuel cost-effectiveness compared to gasoline vehicles as well as the performance of its Superchargers.”
They also stated that other car companies to do not exaggerate range ratings, citing Recurrent’s testing of the Ford Mustang Mach-E, Chevrolet Bolt, and Hyundai Kona:
“Other electric vehicle manufacturers do not overestimate the range of their vehicles to the same extent. For example, Recurrent tested the Ford Mustang Mach-E, the Chevrolet Bolt, and the Hyundai Kona—all electric vehicles and direct competitors to Tesla model vehicles—and found their estimated ranges to be more accurate. In fact, the Hyundai Kona generally underestimated the range the vehicle could travel before requiring a recharge.”
Allegations in the Class Action Suit
The plaintiffs seek to represent anyone in California who purchased any Tesla vehicle and hope to solve questions including:
- a. Whether Tesla model vehicles fail to deliver the advertised estimated vehicle range in normal driving conditions;
- b. Whether Tesla exaggerated its advertised estimated vehicle ranges;
- c. Whether Tesla knew that its advertised estimated vehicle ranges were exaggerated and could not be met under normal driving conditions;
- d. When Tesla gained such knowledge;
- e. Whether Tesla designed, manufacture, marketed, advertised, sold, or otherwise placed its model vehicles into the stream of commerce with such knowledge;
- f. Whether Tesla intentionally concealed the fact that its advertised estimated vehicle ranges were exaggerated or otherwise could not be met under normal driving conditions;
- g. Whether Tesla’s conduct to divert complaints from Class Members who voiced concerns over their Tesla model vehicle’s range violated the terms of Tesla’s warranties;
- h. Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members were harmed by the fraud and deceptive practices alleged herein;
- i. Whether Tesla was unjustly enriched by its deceptive practices; and
- j. Whether Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to equitable or injunctive relief
The case is 3:2023cv03878, Porter et al v. Tesla, Inc., and has been assigned to Judge Laurel Beeler.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk offers to pay TSA salaries as government shutdown leaves agents without paychecks
Elon Musk offered to personally cover TSA salaries as the DHS shutdown deepens travel chaos nationwide.
Elon Musk says that he is willing to personally cover the salaries of Transportation Security Administration (TSA) workers caught in the crossfire of a partial government shutdown that has now dragged on for over a month. “I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country,” Musk wrote.
I would like to offer to pay the salaries of TSA personnel during this funding impasse that is negatively affecting the lives of so many Americans at airports throughout the country
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) March 21, 2026
The offer arrives as Congress let funding expire for the Department of Homeland Security on February 14, amid a disagreement over immigration enforcement, leaving most TSA employees classified as essential and on duty but working without pay. The timing could not be more disruptive, as the shutdown is colliding directly with spring break travel season when millions of Americans are in the air.
This is not the first time TSA workers have endured this kind of hardship. TSA agents are being asked to work without pay until congressional action unblocks their paychecks, having previously held out through the longest government shutdown in U.S. history at 43 days. The pattern reveals a systemic failure in how Congress funds critical security infrastructure, and Musk’s offer shines a spotlight on that recurring failure at a moment when the public is directly feeling its effects through long lines and terminal closures.
Whether Musk can legally follow through remains unclear, as federal law generally prohibits government employees from receiving outside compensation related to their official duties.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI unveiled TERAFAB, a $25B chip factory targeting one terawatt of AI compute annually.
Elon Musk took the stage over the weekend at the defunct Seaholm Power Plant in Austin, Texas, to officially unveil TERAFAB, a $20-25 billion joint venture between Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI that he described as “the most epic chip building exercise in history by far.” The announcement marks the most ambitious infrastructure bet Musk has made since Gigafactory 1 in Sparks, Nevada, and it fuses three of his companies into a single, vertically integrated AI hardware machine for the first time.
TERAFAB is designed to consolidate every stage of semiconductor production under one roof, including chip design, lithography, fabrication, memory production, advanced packaging, and testing. At full capacity, the facility would scale to roughly 70% of the global output from the current world’s largest semiconductor foundry from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC).
Elon Musk’s stated goal is one terawatt of computing power annually, split between Tesla’s AI5 inference chips for vehicles and Optimus robots, and D3 chips built specifically for SpaceXAI’s orbital satellite constellation.
Tesla Terafab set for launch: Inside the $20B AI chip factory that will reshape the auto industry
The logic behind the merger of these three entities is rooted in a supply chain crisis Musk has been signaling for over a year. At Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call, he warned investors that external chip capacity from TSMC, Samsung, and Micron would hit a ceiling within three to four years. “We’re very grateful to our existing supply chain, to Samsung, TSMC, Micron and others,” Musk acknowledged at the Terafab event, “but there’s a maximum rate at which they’re comfortable expanding.” Building in-house was, in his framing, not a strategic option, but a necessity.
The space angle is where the announcement becomes genuinely unprecedented. Musk said 80% of Terafab’s compute output would be directed toward space-based orbital AI satellites, arguing that solar irradiance in space is roughly 5x greater than at Earth’s surface, and that heat rejection in vacuum makes thermal scaling viable. This directly feeds the SpaceXAI vision, which is betting that within two to three years, running AI workloads in orbit will be cheaper than doing so on the ground. The satellites, powered by constant solar energy, would effectively turn low Earth orbit into the world’s largest data center.
Will Tesla join the fold? Predicting a triple merger with SpaceX and xAI
Historically, this announcement threads together every major Musk initiative of the past two years: the xAI-SpaceX merger, Tesla’s $2.9 billion solar equipment talks with Chinese suppliers, the 100 GW domestic solar manufacturing push, the Optimus humanoid robot program, and Starship’s development. TERAFAB is the capstone that ties them into a single coherent architecture — chips made on Earth, launched by SpaceX, powered by Tesla solar, run by xAI, and ultimately extended to the Moon.
“I want us to live long enough to see the mass driver on the moon, because that’s going to be incredibly epic,”Musk said during the presentation.
Announcing TERAFAB: the next step towards becoming a galactic civilization https://t.co/IDKey07mJa
— Tesla (@Tesla) March 22, 2026
News
Rolls-Royce makes shocking move on its EV future
When Rolls-Royce unveiled its first all-electric model, the Spectre, in 2022, former CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös declared the brand would cease production of internal combustion engine vehicles by the end of the decade.
Rolls-Royce made a shocking move on its EV future after planning to go all-electric by the end of the decade. Now, the company is tempering its expectations for electric vehicles, and its CEO is aiming to lean on its legacy of high-powered combustion engines to lead it into the future.
In a significant reversal, Rolls-Royce Motor Cars has scrapped its ambitious plan to become an all-electric manufacturer by 2030. The luxury British marque announced the decision amid sustained customer demand for traditional combustion engines and shifting regulatory landscapes.
When Rolls-Royce unveiled its first all-electric model, the Spectre, in 2022, former CEO Torsten Müller-Ötvös declared the brand would cease production of internal combustion engine vehicles by the end of the decade.
The move aligned with the industry’s broader push toward electrification, promising silent, effortless power befitting the “Rolls-Royce of cars.”
However, new CEO Chris Brownridge, who assumed the role in late 2023, has reversed course. “We can respond to our client demand … we build what is ordered,” Brownridge stated.
The company will continue offering its iconic V12 engines, which remain a cornerstone of its heritage and appeal to discerning buyers who appreciate the distinctive sound and character. He noted the original pledge was “right at the time,” but “the legislation has changed.”
While not abandoning electric vehicles entirely, the Spectre remains in production, with an electric Cullinan option forthcoming; the decision marks the end of a strict all-EV timeline. Relaxed emissions regulations and slowing EV demand, evidenced by a 47 percent drop in Spectre sales to 1,002 units in 2025, forced the reconsideration.
It was a sign that perhaps Rolls-Royce owners were not inclined to believe that the company’s all-EV future was the right move.
Rolls-Royce joins a growing roster of automakers reevaluating aggressive electrification targets.
Fellow luxury brand Bentley has pushed its full electrification from 2030 to 2035, while continuing to offer hybrids and ICE models. Mercedes-Benz walked back its 2030 all-EV goal, now aiming for about 50% electrified sales while keeping combustion engines into the 2030s. Porsche has abandoned its 80% EV sales target by 2030, delaying models and extending hybrids.
Mainstream giants are following suit. Honda canceled its U.S. EV plans, including the 0-Series and Acura RSX, facing a $15.7 billion hit as it doubles down on hybrids. Ford and General Motors have incurred tens of billions in writedowns, canceling models and pivoting to hybrids amid an industry total exceeding $70 billion in charges.
This trend reflects a pragmatic shift driven by infrastructure gaps, consumer preferences, and policy changes. In the ultra-luxury segment, where emotional connection reigns, automakers are prioritizing flexibility over rigid deadlines, ensuring brands like Rolls-Royce evolve without alienating their core clientele.