Claim #5

RICO Conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 1962(d))

26%

Confidence: 11% - 41%

Model Predictions

GPT-5.2

35%

Gemini 2 Flash

25%

Grok 4.1

25%

Claude Opus 4.5

20%

View by Model

Probability Timeline(Consensus)

49%36%22%

Oct 31Jun 20Mar 4Oct 15Mar 1

Oct 31, 2025 order 46%

Motion for Relief Denied (order)

Denial of a motion for relief from a pretrial order is unlikely to have a significant impact on the underlying merits of the RICO claim. It's more of a procedural issue.

Source: Docket #348

Oct 29, 2025 order▲ +3% 46%

Order re Ilya Sutskever Subpoena (order)

Ordering Sutskever to comply with the subpoena could be significant if Sutskever's testimony is crucial to proving the RICO claim's elements, such as a pattern of racketeering activity or conspiracy. Increases the probability if his testimony is expected to be favorable to Musk.

Source: Docket #339

Sep 22, 2025 order 43%

Discovery Dispute Orders (order)

Orders resolving discovery disputes are generally neutral events unless they significantly hinder or help the plaintiff's ability to gather evidence for the RICO claim. Assuming routine disputes, the impact is minimal.

Source: Docket #276, #278

▼Show 21 more events (Aug 12 - Aug 5)

Aug 12, 2025 order 43%

ORDER: Musk's MTD of Counterclaims DENIED; Counts III, XX, XXI DISMISSED (order)

The dismissal of other counts WITH PREJUDICE doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability, unless those counts were essential to proving the RICO claim's underlying predicate acts. Assuming they are separate, the impact is minimal.

Source: Docket #228

Jul 29, 2025 order▼ -1% 43%

Motion to Strike Granted in Part (order)

Granting a motion to strike, even in part, suggests some of the plaintiff's allegations are weak or inadmissible. Slightly decreases the probability.

Source: Docket #222

Jul 25, 2025 order 44%

Case Schedule Modified (order)

Modifying the case schedule is a neutral event that doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability.

Source: Docket #215

Jun 20, 2025 brief▲ +2% 44%

Opposition to SAC MTD Filed (brief)

Plaintiff's opposition to the MTD shows continued effort to defend the claim. Slightly increases the probability.

Source: Docket #181-182

Jun 5, 2025 motion▼ -3% 42%

MTD to Second Amended Complaint Filed (motion)

Another MTD introduces uncertainty. The RICO claim must survive this challenge to proceed.

Source: Docket #173

May 7, 2025 motion 45%

Musk Moves to Dismiss OpenAI Counterclaims (motion)

This motion relates to counterclaims and doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability.

Source: Docket #166

May 1, 2025 order▲ +13% 45%

MTD ORDER: GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART (order)

This is a critical ruling. If the RICO claim survived the MTD, it significantly increases the probability of success. The specific reasoning in the order is crucial. Assuming it survived, this is a positive development.

Source: Docket #163

Apr 9, 2025 order 32%

Case Management Order (order)

The case management order setting a discovery schedule is a neutral event. It simply moves the case forward.

Source: Docket #146

Apr 4, 2025 hearing 32%

MTD Hearing Held (hearing)

The hearing itself doesn't change the probability until the judge rules. It's a period of uncertainty.

Source: Docket #144 Transcript

Mar 24, 2025 brief▲ +2% 32%

Opposition to MTD Filed (brief)

Plaintiff's continued opposition to the MTD shows persistence and a belief in the claim's viability. Slightly increases the probability.

Source: Docket #127-129

Mar 4, 2025 order▼ -4% 30%

PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION DENIED (order)

Denial of the preliminary injunction suggests the plaintiff's case is weak on the merits. While not directly related to the RICO claim, it indicates a general lack of strength in the overall case.

Source: Docket #121

Jan 31, 2025 motion▼ -3% 34%

Defendants' MTD to FAC Filed (motion)

Another motion to dismiss increases uncertainty. The RICO claim's survival depends on overcoming this challenge.

Source: Docket #102

Jan 13, 2025 order 37%

PI Hearing Scheduled (order)

Scheduling the PI hearing doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability. The PI motion is a separate issue.

Source: Docket #93

Dec 27, 2024 brief 37%

PI Reply Brief Filed (brief)

The PI reply brief doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability. The PI motion is a separate issue.

Source: Docket #73

Dec 13, 2024 brief 37%

Opposition to PI Motion Filed (brief)

Opposition to the PI motion doesn't directly impact the RICO claim's probability. The PI motion is a separate issue.

Source: Docket #64-65

Nov 20, 2024 hearing 37%

MTD Hearing Held (hearing)

The hearing itself doesn't change the probability until the judge rules. It's a period of uncertainty.

Source: Hearing Transcript

Oct 15, 2024 brief▲ +2% 37%

Opposition to MTD Filed (brief)

Plaintiff's opposition to the MTD demonstrates a belief in the viability of the claim and an attempt to address the defendant's arguments. Slightly increases the probability of success.

Source: Docket #31

Oct 1, 2024 exhibit▲ +5% 35%

Key Exhibits Submitted (exhibit)

Submission of founding agreement, emails, and financial records provides concrete evidence that could support the RICO claim by demonstrating a pattern of fraudulent activity or conspiracy. The quality and relevance of these exhibits are key.

Source: Exhibits 1-25

Sep 15, 2024 motion▼ -3% 30%

Motion to Dismiss Filed (motion)

The filing of a motion to dismiss introduces uncertainty. The success of the RICO claim depends on surviving this motion. The specific arguments raised in the MTD will be crucial.

Source: Docket #23

Aug 20, 2024 declaration▲ +3% 33%

Musk Declaration Filed (declaration)

Musk's sworn declaration provides direct evidence supporting the allegations, potentially strengthening the RICO claim if it establishes a pattern of racketeering activity or conspiracy. The impact depends on the content of the declaration.

Source: Musk Decl.

Aug 5, 2024 filing▲ +5% 30%

Complaint Refiled (FAC) (filing)

Refiling with additional allegations and exhibits suggests the plaintiff has addressed the weaknesses that led to the initial dismissal. Slightly increases the probability.

Source: Docket #1 (new)

Mar 8, 2024 filing▼ -10% 25%

Voluntary Dismissal (filing)

Voluntary dismissal, even without prejudice, suggests weaknesses in the initial case or strategy. Reduces confidence in the claim's viability.

Source: Docket #12

Mar 1, 2024 filing 35%

Complaint Filed (filing)

Initial filing of the complaint. RICO claims are complex and often face high hurdles, so starting with a moderate probability.

Source: Docket #1

Evidence from Filings

cl_25_6Oct 8, 2024

Motion to Dismiss Argument

"These deficiencies also necessarily defeat Musk’s claim for RICO conspiracy (Count V). See, e.g., Sanford v. MemberWorks, Inc., 625 F.3d 550, 559 (9th Cir. 2010) (“Plaintiffs cannot claim that a conspiracy to violate RICO existed if they do not adequately plead a substantive violation of RICO.” (quoting Howard v. Am. Online Inc., 208 F.3d 741, 751 (9th Cir. 2000)))."

cl_1_0Aug 5, 2024

Original Complaint

"Altman, Brockman, and the OpenAI For-Profit Entities have undertaken the fraudulent acts described in Count IV above as part of a common scheme. Defendants willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully conspired, confederated, and agreed together and with others to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)-(c), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)."

cl_32_0Nov 14, 2024

First Amended Complaint

"Altman, Brockman, the For-Profit Entities, and Microsoft have undertaken the wrongful acts described in Count XXV above as part of a common scheme. Defendants willfully, knowingly, and unlawfully conspired, confederated, and agreed together and with others to violate 18 U.S.C. § 1962(a)-(c), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d)."

cl_25_0Oct 8, 2024

Motion to Dismiss Argument

"Musk’s RICO claims come nowhere close to meeting these exacting standards. Despite piling on a host of irrelevant allegations—covering everything from OpenAI’s content partnerships with publishers (see ¶ 212) to Altman’s dismissal and reinstatement as CEO in November 2023 (see ¶¶ 222-24)—Musk’s allegations of wire fraud are largely duplicative of his promissory fraud allegations."

cl_64_14Dec 13, 2024

News Article

"Mr. Musk filed the new suit in federal court in part because it argues that OpenAI violated federal racketeering laws by conspiring to defraud Mr. Musk, his lawyer, Marc Toberoff, said in an interview."

Legal Standard

Preponderance of the evidence

1. An agreement to commit a substantive RICO violation existed
2. Defendant knowingly joined the conspiracy
3. An overt act was committed in furtherance of the conspiracy

See: Salinas v. United States, 522 U.S. 52 (1997)

Element Analysis (Consensus)

An agreement to commit a substantive RICO violation existedweak

Evidence For

Musk alleges a common scheme and conspiracy to violate RICO (cl_1_0, cl_32_0).

Evidence Against

Defendants argue that Musk fails to adequately plead the underlying fraud, which is necessary for the RICO claim to stand (cl_25_6).
Defendants argue that Musk's allegations are largely duplicative of his promissory fraud allegations and fail to meet the exacting standards required for RICO claims (cl_25_0).

Model Analysis: This element is weak because it depends on the success of the underlying RICO claim, which is itself based on a weak fraud claim. The evidence of a specific agreement is lacking.

Defendant knowingly joined the conspiracyweak

Evidence For

Musk alleges that Altman, Brockman, the For-Profit Entities, and Microsoft knowingly conspired (cl_32_0).

Evidence Against

Defendants argue that Musk has not pleaded the underlying fraud with sufficient particularity to establish that they knowingly joined any conspiracy (cl_25_0, cl_25_6).

Model Analysis: This element is weak because it relies on proving the defendants' knowledge of and participation in the alleged fraudulent scheme, which is not well-supported by the evidence.

An overt act was committed in furtherance of the conspiracymoderate

Evidence For

Musk alleges that the defendants' fraudulent acts, such as exploiting OpenAI's assets for private gain, constitute overt acts (cl_1_0, cl_32_0).

Evidence Against

Defendants argue that Musk has not adequately pleaded that the alleged acts were in furtherance of a conspiracy (cl_25_0).
Defendants argue that Musk has not adequately pleaded conduct of an enterprise (cl_25_0, cl_25_6).

Model Analysis: This element is moderately strong because there is evidence of actions taken by the defendants, but the connection to a specific agreement to violate RICO is tenuous.

Overall Assessment

Key Strengths

Musk alleges a common scheme and conspiracy.
There is evidence of actions taken by the defendants.

Key Weaknesses

The claim depends on the success of the underlying RICO claim, which is based on a weak fraud claim.
Evidence of a specific agreement to violate RICO is lacking.