You could call it a no-nonsense move by a US federal judge to widen the scope of discovery in the tussle between X, xAI and their opponents. On June 2, Judge Mark Pittman put out a 900-word order that set aside any objections and made it plain: if there are cross-company communications in this case, they’re to be produced.
Some of the main things the court made a point of:
– We have a 900-word order from June 2.
– X and xAI’s objections were put aside.
– Tesla and SpaceX inboxes are to be included in production.
– If they are of any import, so are the texts and XChat.
– It was noted the xAI CFO used Musk’s SpaceX address.
– In talks with Apple, X and xAI came up.
– What was turned over: 10 emails, 2 texts.
– All under Rule 34(a)(1).
What you have here is a ruling that says being at the helm of multiple companies won’t let you hide records that pertain to X and xAI. The court has seen evidence of business for X and xAI moving through all kinds of inboxes – Tesla and SpaceX included – as well as text and XChat, so those are now up for grabs.
The strategic stakes for Apple, OpenAI, and Musk
X and xAI are making some hard accusations in this suit, to the effect that Apple and OpenAI are not playing fair when it comes to AI and App Store rankings. For his part, Musk has contended that the way Apple and OpenAI are in bed with one another is to the detriment of other AI services on an iPhone. Both have put the lie to any impropriety, and we’ll see where the case goes from here.
There’s a question of how far a court can go in its inquiry when one man is running the show at more than one company. By making Tesla and SpaceX cough up their systems, the court is looking to see if any of the moves X and xAI made were done through other corporate back channels. Those could very well define the story of how competition is handled in the AI space.
What the order says
Judge Pittman is standing by a May 13, 2026 order from Magistrate Judge Ray that called for any and all responsive docs from Musk’s time at Tesla and SpaceX, whether in email, text or XChat. He put down the Plaintiffs’ objection and left a Motion to Stay where it was.
Why the court said the emails are within control
With Fed. R. Civ. P 34(a)(1) and Rule 26(b) in mind, the order is firm: X and xAI have to turn over what they have. And since Musk is the one with the top jobs at X, xAI, Tesla and SpaceX, the court sees no reason he doesn’t have the reins on these records.
It’s not without precedent. The order points to cases like Inland Concrete Enterprises, Inc. v. Kraft Americas, L.P., 2011 WL 13209239, at *3, and even a 2025 matter, Musk v. Altman, No. 24-cv-04722-YGR (TSH), 2025 WL 2348769, at *1. You see the same line of thinking in Ultravision Techs., LLC v. Govision, LLC, 2020 WL 10692709, at *2.
Some specifics make the case for the ruling.
According to the court, xAI’s CFO has been in the habit of running financials by Musk on his SpaceX email. There is also proof that he put an Apple exec in touch with him at his Tesla and SpaceX inboxes for a chat on “an update on X about the election, advertising, etc.,” as well as to go over xAI’s product and model ambitions, its infrastructure, and some “views on AI.”
Then there are the text messages from Musk where you can see his own Tesla email in the to-line. Put it all together and the court was of the mind that X and xAI were doing business outside their own email systems, so they should be made to produce what they have.
Judge Pittman was not impressed with the meager discovery put forward up to this point. The order makes plain that we’re looking at just ten emails and two texts from Musk, and given what he has said about the defendants, it seems like some of the more pertinent correspondence is absent.
How we got here
This has been a slow burn since the case was put in front of the court in August 2025. You could call this latest decision another bump in the road for Musk, coming on the heels of some sparring in the courtroom over claims that xAI had been holding back or even destroying evidence.
The net for discovery has been cast wider to now include some at Apple. Craig Federighi, the head of software, was made a document custodian earlier in the year. They tried to make the same of Tim Cook, but the record shows that didn’t fly.
In one sense, the ruling ratchets up the discovery risk for all of Musk’s ventures. It’s a reminder that if you are an executive with a hand in several companies, you can’t put a wall around your communications when they bear on the matter at hand.
For the AI market
It also means X and xAI will have to keep up the competitive story they are telling with Apple and OpenAI. The documents suggest the court will be looking at cross-company chatter to see if it has anything to do with the anticompetitive behavior they are being accused of.
There is still more to come in the months ahead. Now that Judge Pittman has opened the door to Tesla and SpaceX files, the case is set to get into a more in-depth review of the papers, even if the central issues are no closer to being settled.
