Law360 (April 7, 2026, 10:30 PM EDT) -- Elon Musk said Tuesday he wants OpenAI CEO Sam Altman stripped of his title and "all equity and other personal financial benefits" to be awarded to OpenAI's nonprofit if Musk wins his case claiming OpenAI duped him, saying he isn't after "a remedy directed to benefiting himself personally."

Musk made the clarifications in an amendment to his notice of remedies, specifying his requests are "strictly tied to his purpose in bringing this lawsuit: to prevent the subordination of a public charity — one he co-founded and for which he was the primary supporter during its formative years — to private, for-profit interests."

"Plaintiff does not and will not seek these funds for himself," the notice said. "He seeks their return to the charitable trust that was breached."

Specifically, Musk said Altman and OpenAI President Greg Brockman should be removed as officers and directors. They should also "disgorge to the OpenAI charity all equity and other personal financial benefits they obtained as a result of OpenAI's for-profit operations, including all profits derived from self-dealing transactions," Musk said.

Notably, Musk said he wants a court order unwinding the for-profit business component and restructuring OpenAI "to the role of a bona fide public charity that operates as the nonprofit it was intended to be, consistent with its founding charter and mission."

Finally, he said he wants an order requiring "disgorgement of all ill-gotten gains flowing from OpenAI's unauthorized for-profit conversion and operations — not limited to Altman and Brockman's personal equity, but extending to all financial interests improperly diverted from the charity and its charitable mission."

"This includes assets obtained through transactions that subordinated the nonprofit's charitable purposes to the financial interests of private investors and for-profit partners such as Microsoft, as well as self-dealing transactions by insiders," Musk said. "Any assets obtained at the charity's expense belong to the OpenAI charity and must be returned to it."

He added that "to whatever extent the central role of injunctive relief was not clear from Musk's prior filings, it should be clear now."

Musk's case is headed to trial this month, nearly two years after he and his company X.AI Corp. sued to stop OpenAI from becoming a for-profit entity. According to the suit, Altman, Brockman, Musk and a nonparty computer scientist founded OpenAI as a nonprofit.

In its early years, Musk donated $38 million to OpenAI, mostly without a long written contract, including $5 million per quarter in 2016 and 2017, and $12.7 million to pay for OpenAI's leased office space from September 2016 to September 2020, according to court documents.

Musk said OpenAI and Altman reversed the mission and reneged on a promise to make technological advances open to the public. He also accused OpenAI's major financial backer, Microsoft Corp., of making anticompetitive deals with OpenAI to block investors from funding rivals like Musk's AI company.

Meanwhile, OpenAI filed tortious interference counterclaims, among others against Musk, arguing it never made explicit promises to Musk and accusing him of a targeted campaign of "harassment" against it.

Musk says in his Tuesday filing that Altman, Brockman and others accumulated billions of dollars in assets and then converted those assets "into a wealth machine for themselves, Microsoft and Silicon Valley insiders."

"That is what Musk brings this action to stop," the filing said. "Musk therefore will not seek, either at trial or in equitable proceedings afterwards, a remedy directed to benefiting himself personally."

Late last month, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers placed evidentiary guardrails on the upcoming trial, excluding evidence on Musk's ketamine use and WilmerHale's investigation into Sam Altman's dismissal, but allowing evidence on Musk's rival company, his romance with an ex-OpenAI board member and his Burning Man trip.

OpenAI said in a statement Tuesday that Musk — "at the eleventh hour" — "is pretending to change his tune about attacking the nonprofit OpenAI Foundation."

"The truth is that this case has always been about Elon generating more power and more money for what he wants," OpenAI said. "Having increasingly realized that his attempt to damage the nonprofit OpenAI Foundation rests on a baseless legal case, Elon is once again trying to change the narrative and save face as the trial approaches. His lawsuit remains nothing more than a harassment campaign that's driven by ego, jealousy and a desire to slow down a competitor."

Counsel for Musk didn't immediately respond to a request for comment late Tuesday.

Musk is represented by Marc Toberoff of Toberoff & Associates PC and Steven F. Molo, Robert K. Kry, Jennifer Schubert, Walter Hawes, Alex Eynon and Sara Tofighbakhsh of MoloLamken LLP.

The OpenAI parties are represented by Jordan D. Eth, William Frentzen and David J. Wiener of Morrison Foerster LLP, William Savitt, Bradley R. Wilson, Sarah K. Eddy, Steven P. Winter and Nathaniel D. Cullerton of Wachtell Lipton Rosen & Katz and Alison L. Plessman, Stephanie Xiao and Nicholas Kellum of Hueston Hennigan LLP.

Microsoft is represented by Russell P. Cohen, Howard M. Ullman, Nisha Patel, Andrew J. Levander and Jay Jurata of Dechert LLP.

The case is Elon Musk et al. v. OpenAI Inc. et al., case number 4:24-cv-04722, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

--Additional reporting by Dorothy Atkins, Bryan Koenig, Bonnie Eslinger and Gina Kim. Editing by Kristen Becker.

For a reprint of this article, please contact reprints@law360.com.