Tag: lawsuits

Judge Prevents Elon Musk’s Case Against OpenAI from Turning into a Trial of AI

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers repeatedly intervened during the third day of Elon Musk’s testimony in his lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman, steering attorneys away from broad debates about AI’s potential threat to humanity.

NBC News reports that the contentious legal battle between Elon Musk and OpenAI entered its third day with Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers firmly redirecting the proceedings back to the core legal issues at hand. The case centers on Musk’s claims that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman betrayed public trust by enriching himself through the AI company they co-founded in 2015 as a nonprofit organization.

The day began with a heated exchange when Musk’s attorney Steven Molo attempted to discuss AI’s potential dangers. “This is a real risk, we all could die as a result of artificial intelligence,” Molo argued in objection to the judge’s efforts to limit the discussion.

Judge Rogers quickly shut down this line of argument, pointing out the irony in Musk’s position. “It’s ironic your client, despite these risks, is creating a company that is in the exact space,” Rogers stated. “There are some people who do not want to put the future of humanity in Mr. Musk’s hands … But we’re not going to get into that business.”

The lawsuit represents the culmination of a years-long dispute between the two tech leaders, who have previously exchanged public criticism online. Altman was present in the courtroom during Musk’s testimony on Wednesday and Thursday.

The four-week trial could have significant implications for OpenAI’s future and its flagship product, ChatGPT. Musk is seeking approximately $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and co-defendant Microsoft, one of OpenAI’s major financial supporters. His lawsuit claims that OpenAI benefited substantially from his financial contributions, advice, recruitment assistance, and business connections.

Keep reading

Bombshell sex harassment suit against Lorna Hajdini, JPMorgan branded ‘complete fabrication’ as John Doe is unmasked

A former JPMorgan staffer whom sources identified as Chirayu Rana has been accused of making fabricated sexual harassment claims against a high-ranking executive at the bank after an internal investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, The Post has learned.

Multiple sources told The Post that 35-year-old Rana, now a principal at investment firm Bregal Sagemount, is the man who brought the bombshell lawsuit against Lorna Hajdini earlier this week.

Rana’s suit, filed on Monday under the pseudonym John Doe, accused the 37-year-old executive director of turning him into her “sex slave” by drugging him with Rohypnol and Viagra and threatening to slash his bonus if he did not comply.

The Daily Mail broke the story on Wednesday evening, citing lurid details from a now-retracted court document that has been withdrawn for “corrections.”

The British tabloid, quoting the now-deleted court papers, reported that Hajdini, executive director on JPMorgan’s leveraged finance team, even turned up unannounced at Rana’s apartment and forced him to have sex.

Hajdini hit back in a statement issued to The Post via her lawyers: “Lorna categorically denies the allegations. She never engaged in any inappropriate conduct with this individual of any kind and has never even been to the location where the alleged sexual assault supposedly took place.”

Rana, who did not reply to The Post’s multiple requests for comment, claimed that the alleged coercion began shortly after he joined JPMorgan’s leveraged finance team in the spring of 2024.

He filed an internal complaint in May 2025, alleging race- and gender-based harassment and abuse of power, before trying to negotiate a payoff that ran into “millions” to leave the company, sources said.

The suit also named JPMorgan Chase as a defendant, accusing the bank of retaliation and failing to investigate properly.

Daniel J. Kaiser, the attorney listed on the New York County Supreme Court docket as representing “John Doe,” did not return The Post’s calls seeking comment.

Keep reading

DOJ Sues New Jersey Over Mask Ban for Law Enforcement

The U.S. Department of Justice is suing New Jersey over a law that bars local, state, and federal law enforcement officers from wearing masks and requires them to show identification before making arrests.

Filed on April 29 in federal court in Newark, New Jersey, the lawsuit requests an injunction to block New Jersey’s Law Enforcement Officer Protection Act, which applies to all law enforcement officers, including federal Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents.

The Justice Department argues that the law is unconstitutional, calling it an “illegal attempt to regulate the federal government” and saying that it would compromise the safety of federal officers.

Threatening federal agents with prosecution for concealing their identities during detentions “chills the enforcement of federal law and compromises sensitive law enforcement operations,” the agency said.

“The Department of Justice will steadfastly protect the privacy and safety of law enforcement from unconstitutional state laws like New Jersey’s,” Assistant Attorney General Brett A. Shumate of the Justice Department’s Civil Division said in a statement.

In February, a federal judge preliminarily blocked a similar law in California that barred federal agents from concealing their faces while working.

Keep reading

Target worker ruined innocent customer’s life with fake story about seeing naked girls on his iPhone, stress of being ‘labeled’ led to cardiac arrest: Family

A Target employee in Oregon “ruined” an innocent customer’s life with a fake story about seeing photos of naked girls on his iPhone, with the stress of being “labeled a demon” who liked child sexual abuse images aggravating a heart condition he had and killing him, his family said after filing a lawsuit. A jury ordered the retail giant to pay up last week.

“Defendants intentionally instigated the FBI to detain plaintiff and to search plaintiff’s home based on false information defendants provided to law enforcement,” a 2019 civil complaint filed by Jeffrey Buckmeyer’s estate and obtained by Law&Crime alleged.

Last week, a Multnomah County Circuit Court jury ordered Target to pay $150,000 for the “intentional infliction of emotional harm” and distress, which will be going to Buckmeyer’s daughter, according to his girlfriend and mother of the child, Patty Anselmo, who took over the case after Buckmeyer died in April 2019 of cardiac arrest.

“He was labeled a demon,” Anselmo told The Oregonian. “I certainly think this pressed the ‘fast forward’ button for Jeff,” she said about his heart condition.

Anselmo and her lawyer, Michael Fuller, believe the stress of the allegations hurled at Buckmeyer made his heart condition worse and played a role in his death. They accused Target and the employee at the store in Tigard who randomly targeted Buckmeyer, who had no criminal history, of “intentionally” instigating the FBI to detain the Portland father and search his home “based on false information” provided to law enforcement.

“Specifically, defendants intentionally, knowingly, and falsely reported to law enforcement that defendants saw child abuse or child pornography materials on plaintiff’s mobile phone,” the complaint said. “Plaintiff never had child abuse or child pornography materials on his mobile phone.”

According to the complaint, the Target worker — described as a cellphone technician in the electronics section — claimed Buckmeyer came to the store in July 2018 and asked for help deleting a large folder of photos from his phone of items that he sold on eBay.

The employee said he opened a file on the phone and saw photos of naked underage girls, some of whom were tied up. They claimed Buckmeyer was visible in some of the photos, and that he had an erection. He notified Target management who then called law enforcement.

The FBI launched an investigation after receiving the report from Target and “seized various electronics” from Buckmeyer, which were probed and examined over the course of several months.

“[Buckmeyer’s] neighbors were made aware of the search warrant and plaintiff was limited in his ability to spend time with his own child while the FBI completed its investigation,” the complaint alleged. “Ultimately the FBI concluded that plaintiff did not have any child abuse or child pornography materials and returned plaintiff’s electronics.”

Buckmeyer’s case was dropped and he was never arrested or charged in relation to the accusation, according to court records. An independent forensics expert reviewed his mobile phone and determined that he did not have any child abuse or child pornography materials on it, with the expert and two others testifying during a five-day trial earlier this month.

Keep reading

First-Of-Its-Kind Federal Geoengineering Lawsuit Filed By The GeoFight

A first-of-its-kind federal lawsuit sets forth allegations by an atmospheric scientist that historical weather data was manipulated and destroyed in order to justify weather modification and geoengineering activities. The case, Mabie v. United States (Case No. 1:26-cv-00274-SBP), involves an amended complaint filed by a legal coalition known as The GeoFight.

The complaint challenges the reliability and integrity of long-standing weather datasets used over multiple decades, including during the Obama and Biden administrations, to model climate trends, support federal rulemaking, and justify large-scale environmental initiatives, including geoengineering and weather modification. It also adds claims against the University of Colorado, Boulder, alleging retaliation and violations of federal whistleblower protections.

At the center of the case is Justin Mabie, a former steward of critical historical weather datasets used by the United States government, the United Nations, and other global entities. He asserts that historical data was destroyed in order to create a narrative aligned with political objectives, but not based on science.

The lawsuit also alleges that companies have been permitted to enter U.S. airspace, with the knowledge of the U.S. government, and release particles and gases intended to influence solar radiation, while significant funding from U.S., foreign, and private entities has been directed toward developing methods to intervene in weather systems.

The complaint further details that Mabie reported concerns regarding data handling, record preservation, and access to sensitive systems to NOAA officials, military personnel, and university leadership, including issues involving potential foreign access to restricted infrastructure. Rather than being protected, Mabie was allegedly subjected to a sustained pattern of retaliation, including harassment and eventual termination by the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Recent federal budget decisions, including actions under President Donald J. Trump to reduce or eliminate funding associated with certain geoengineering-related initiatives, have prompted renewed scrutiny of the scope, oversight, and underlying basis of such programs.

Keep reading

EFF Sues DHS and ICE For Records on Subpoenas Seeking to Unmask Online Critics

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) today demanding public records about their use of administrative subpoenas to try to identify their online critics.

Court records and news reports show that in the past year, DHS has used administrative subpoenas to unmask or locate people who have documented ICE’s activities in their community, criticized the government, or attended protests. The subpoenas are sent to technology companies to demand information about internet users who are often engaged in protected First Amendment activity.

These subpoenas are dangerous because they don’t require judges’ approval. But they are also unlawful, and the government knows it. When a few users challenged them in court with the help of American Civil Liberties Union affiliates in Northern California and Pennsylvania, DHS withdrew them rather than waiting for a decision.

DHS and ICE have ignored EFF’s public-records requests for documents about the processes behind these subpoenas, so EFF sued Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“DHS and ICE should not be able to first claim that they have the legal authority to unmask critics and then run from court when users challenge these administrative subpoenas,” said EFF Deputy Legal Director Aaron Mackey. “The public deserves to know what laws the agencies believe give them the power to issue these speech-chilling subpoenas.”

An administrative subpoena cannot be used to obtain the content of communications, but they have been used to try and obtain some basic subscriber information like name, address, IP address, length of service, and session times. If a technology company refuses to comply, an agency’s only recourse is to drop it or go to court and try to convince a judge that the request is lawful.

EFF and the ACLU of Northern California in February ​wrote to Amazon, Apple, Discord, Google, Meta, Microsoft, Reddit, SNAP, TikTok, and X​ to ask that they insist on court intervention and an order before complying with a DHS subpoena; give users as much notice as possible when they are the target of a subpoena, so the users can seek help; and resist gag orders that would prevent the companies from notifying users who are targets of subpoenas.

And EFF last week ​asked California’s and New York’s attorneys general to investigate Google​ for deceptive trade practices for breaking ​its promise​ to notify users before handing their data to law enforcement, citing the case of a doctoral student who was targeted with an ICE subpoena after briefly attending a pro-Palestine protest.

Keep reading

DOJ joins Musk’s AI company in suing Colorado for new ‘DEI’ regulatory law

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has announced its support for Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, xAI, as it sues the state of Colorado over a new law set to go into effect in June that would regulate AI technology.

The company filed a suit against Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser on Thursday to prevent the enforcement of the law, which would impose new requirements on AI programs to protect users from “algorithmic discrimination” in education, employment, healthcare, housing and financial services, and other sectors.

xAI argued that the statute “severely burdens the development and use of AI” and infringes on First Amendment free speech protections.

“Its provisions prohibit developers of AI systems from producing speech that the State of Colorado dislikes, while compelling them to conform their speech to a State-enforced orthodoxy on controversial topics of great public concern,” the lawsuit reads.

It also claims that the law would force Musk’s company to rework its AI chatbot called Grok, which can be found on the social media platform X, to “conform to a controversial, highly politicized viewpoint” instead of maintaining its objectivity.

The DOJ’s Civil Rights Division announced on Friday that it partnered with the Civil Division to file a motion to intervene in the suit.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon said in a video posted to social media that the state law in question requires companies to comply with its “crazy, woke, DEI goals,” referring to the “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion” policies instated widely across left-leaning and liberal organizations.

Keep reading

Cincinnati Police Chief Who Was Sued For Anti-White Discrimination Finally Fired

The Gateway Pundit reported in October that Cincinnati Police Chief Teresa Theetge was placed on paid administrative leave after she was sued for anti-white bias.

WLWT reported at the time that City Manager Sheryl Long noted, “The City continues to face serious public safety challenges that underscore the need for stability at the command level.”

“Therefore, I’ve named Assistant Chief Adam Hennie as Interim Police Chief. Our focus remains on maintaining stability within the department and ensuring the highest standards of service to our residents. I have full confidence in Interim Chief Hennie and the department’s command staff to continue their dedicated work at this time.”

The civil rights lawsuit, filed by four veteran members of the Cincinnati Police Department, alleged workplace discrimination against the city and Police Chief Theetge.

The lawsuit alleges, according to WXIX, “The City and Chief Theetge have actively and systemically undertaken efforts to promote, advance, and make promotion and assignment decisions that are preferable to women and minorities, and to the exclusion of white men, including through hiring, diversity initiatives, outreach programs, promotional processes, and other steps that demonstrate both a systemic practice of discrimination against white males, and that there are background circumstances to support the suspicion that the defendant is that unusual employer who discriminates against the majority.”

“Plaintiffs, who are all white males, applied for, and did not receive those positions. Furthermore, as respects the preferential assignments, each of the Plaintiffs were qualified for those positions.”

“And similarly situated persons received those preferential assignments on the basis of race and/or sex. Plaintiffs were treated differently than similarly situated employees of a different race and/or sex.”

On Friday, Fox News reported that City Manager Sheryl Long announced Theetge’s termination.

Keep reading

Trump Administration Seeks Pause Of Lawsuit Challenging Vaccine Recommendations

Trump administration lawyers on April 23 said they are still considering whether to appeal a ruling that blocked the rollback of guidance on some vaccines.

The lawyers said in a filing that pausing the litigation over the guidance pending the resolution of any appeal that is filed would “promote judicial economy and avoid burdens on government agencies that may be rendered unnecessary by a decision on any appeal.”

For instance, if an appeal is filed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit may dismiss some or all of the claims by plaintiffs in the case, which would eliminate the need for the government to produce records sought by plaintiffs, the lawyers told U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in a motion to stay proceedings pending resolution of any appeal.

“At a minimum, a First Circuit decision on any appeal could narrow the issues in dispute and provide guidance on how to resolve any remaining issues,” the motion stated. “If Defendants continue producing administrative records and the parties start briefing cross-motions for summary judgment before Defendants’ time to appeal has run and before the First Circuit has an opportunity to weigh in on any appeal, there is a significant potential for wasted time and resources.”

Murphy in March stayed the updates made to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccine guidance under Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., resulting in the guidance reverting to what had been in place in mid-2025.

Murphy concluded that Kennedy and other officials did not follow proper procedure in updating the guidance and appointing new members to the CDC’s vaccine advisory committee.

That stay would remain in effect even if Murphy approves the requested motion, administration lawyers said.

The lawyers did not say why no appeal has been lodged against Murphy’s decision. They asked him to stay proceedings in the case until whichever comes later: May 15 or the resolution of any appeal the defendants may file.

The deadline to appeal Murphy’s preliminary injunction is May 15.

Shortly after the injunction was issued, the Department of Health and Human Services said it would prevail in an appeal. The department has declined to answer questions about why an appeal has not yet been lodged.

“Unless officially announced by us, any assertions about what we are doing next is baseless speculation,” a department spokesperson told The Epoch Times in March.

Keep reading

NYC Neighborhood Where 70% of People Voted for Zohran Mamdani Now Suing His Administration for Locating a Homeless Shelter There

The people of the East Village neighborhood in New York City are getting exactly what they voted for and they are not happy about it.

In fact, the people of this neighborhood, who voted for Mamdani by a margin of 70 percent, are now suing his administration because they don’t like his plan to locate a new homeless shelter there.

Have they not heard about the warmth of collectivism? Isn’t this precisely what they voted for?

From the New York Post:

East Villagers sue Mamdani to stop relocation of notorious Bellevue men’s homeless shelter into their neighborhood

Enraged East Villagers sued Mayor Zohran Mamdani in a last-gasp effort to stop the relocation of hundreds of homeless men to a new shelter in their neighborhood.

The lawsuit filed Monday seeks an emergency restraining order that would prevent the “rushed” May 1 opening of the intake shelter along Third Street.

The site was selected by City Hall as one of two intake shelters in Manhattan that would effectively replace the notorious Bellevue homeless shelter — a haven for often-dangerous vagrants that Mamdani plans to close by the end of the month.

But Mamdani and city officials not only underhandedly declared an “emergency” to close the Midtown shelter, their decision to plunk its clientele into the East Village was dangerously slapdash, the lawsuit contends.

“This case is not about the City’s decision to close the Bellevue Intake Shelter,” the Manhattan Supreme Court filing states.

“It challenges only the City’s hastily made and legally invalid decision to [locate] a new citywide homeless adult male intake center at 8 East 3rd Street without following any of the legal requirements that must precede such a significant and consequential decision.”

Keep reading