Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

A court in the US has cleared <keyword id="6355315" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="elon-musk" source="Orion">Elon Musk</keyword> in a class-action securities fraud over his tweets about taking <keyword id="107096" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="tesla" source="Orion">Tesla</keyword> private. The jurors deliberated for about two hours before reaching the verdict, called a "disappointed" one by <keyword id="13665005" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="nicholas-porritt" source="Orion">Nicholas Porritt</keyword>, partner at <keyword id="4990359" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="levi-korsinsky" source="Orion">Levi &amp; Korsinsky</keyword>, the firm representing the Tesla shareholders in the class action, reports CNBC. <keyword id="364027" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="musk" source="Orion">Musk</keyword> tweeted that he is "deeply appreciative of the jury's unanimous finding". His lead counsel <keyword id="3144856" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="alex-spiro" source="Orion">Alex Spiro</keyword> argued before the jury on Friday, saying "fraud cannot be built on the back of a consideration". The controversial 2018 tweets by Musk on taking Tesla private has come back to haunt him and he stands to lose billions. The plaintiffs have argued that Musk's tweets about taking Tesla private, in which he said he had "funding secured", led them to lose millions of dollars. Musk had earlier admitted in a US court that he ignored his advisors and investors while tweeting about Tesla securing funding in 2018. In August 2018, he had tweeted: "Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured." "Shareholders could either sell at 420 or hold shares &amp; go private," he added. The notorious tweet had cost him his role as Chairman of Tesla. The August 2018 tweet resulted in Musk and Tesla reaching a settlement of fraud charges with the US SEC. The settlement included $40 million in penalties, split equally between the company and Musk, and the removal of Musk as chairman of the Tesla board. SEE ALSO: <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="97596818" title="Paytm founder announces operating profitability, says free cash flow generation is next" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div><div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="97596720" title="India logs 128 fresh Covid cases" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div>

Elon Musk cleared of fraud charges in 'Tesla funding secured' case

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Elon Musk testified in a civil trial Monday that he wasn't joking about taking Tesla private at $420 a share.</li><li>He said the price was a roughly "20% premium" over Tesla stock when he tweeted about it in 2018.</li></ul>Elon Musk denied before a jury on Monday that his infamous 2018 tweet about possibly taking Tesla private at a share price of $420 <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sec-says-elon-musks-420-price-point-was-a-weed-reference-2018-9">was a joke for the benefit of then-girlfriend Grimes.</a>But he does see significance in the number, which is popular in cannabis culture."There is some, I think, karma around 420," he told Nicholas Porritt, an attorney at Levi &amp; Korsinsky LLP who is representing Tesla investors in a civil class-action lawsuit <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-quotes-tesla-shareholder-funding-secured-lawsuit-trial-2023-1">over his tweet in August 2018</a>, in which <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1026872652290379776" target="_blank" rel="noopener">he'd claimed he had "funding secured"</a> for a potential deal to take Tesla private. "I should question whether that is good or bad karma at this point," Musk added, doubling down on his reference to a concept in Hindu mythology about the consequences of actions in a past life. He insisted however, that the number was not a joke, as financial regulators had alleged at the time. He testified on Monday that the number was a "coincidence," saying it represented a roughly "20 percent premium" over Tesla's stock at the time. The day of his tweet on Aug. 7, 2018, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-says-may-take-tesla-private-2018-8">the company's stock rose to $371.15</a>. "I don't know if she found it funny or not," Musk testified, referring to his girlfriend at the time, the musician Grimes. "But the 420 price was not a joke."Musk has shown his penchant for "420" marijuana references on other occasions, as the number was also built into the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/musk-seeking-investors-for-twitter-at-5420-a-share-2022-12">$54.20 share price</a> at which he purchased Twitter last year. Musk had made it something of a brand, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-smokes-weed-on-joe-rogan-experience-podcast-2018-9?r=US&amp;IR=T">smoking weed in an appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast</a> in 2018.

Elon Musk testifies that he thinks the number 420 has 'karma,' but he's not sure if it's 'good or bad'

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Elon Musk was cleared Friday by a federal jury over his "funding secured" 2018 tweet to take Tesla private.</li><li>Following the verdict, the billionaire's first words on Twitter were: "Thank goodness."</li></ul>Elon Musk showed his appreciation for the jurors who cleared him after Tesla investors claimed <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-wins-trial-over-funding-secured-tesla-tweet-report-2023-2?r=US&amp;IR=T">that his 2018 "funding secured"</a> tweet was meant to intentionally influence investors. "Thank goodness" the billionaire <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1621653950947799042?s=20&amp;t=dAdaiujLyQNUi3EPnmV9EA">tweeted</a> late Friday night following the verdict by a federal jury of nine individuals in the civil trial."The wisdom of the people has prevailed!" the billionaire added. "I am deeply appreciative of the jury's unanimous finding of innocence in the Tesla 420 take-private case."Musk's 2018 tweet, which pushed Tesla's shareholders to launch the costly legal battle against him, read: "Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured." The jurors were asked to decide whether Musk had purposely misguided investors, as the deal did not go through.During the trial, Musk's lawyers described <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-blames-saudi-investor-backpedaling-taking-tesla-private-trial-2023-1" rel="">a meeting</a> the tech billionaire held with Yasir Al-Rumayyan, an official in Saudi Arabia's Private Investment Fund, where Musk said Al-Rumayyan pledged to help finance the deal to take Tesla private.<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-blames-saudi-investor-backpedaling-taking-tesla-private-trial-2023-1">Musk told jurors</a> in January that he trusted Al-Rumayyan's verbal promises, which led to the "funding secured" tweet about taking Tesla private. The investors' attorney, Nicholas Porritt of Levi &amp; Korsinsky LLP, refuted Musk's claims and argued that a conversation of that nature would have some written record. However, Musk's attorney, Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &amp; Sullivan, said in closing arguments that the Tesla founder was being portrayed as a "fire-breathing dragon," and that he couldn't be prosecuted for being a "bad Tweeter."Musk and Spiro didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from Insider, made outside normal working hours.

Elon Musk says he is 'deeply appreciative' of the jury that cleared him in the Tesla trial, tweeting 'Thank goodness'

<ul class="summary-list"><li>A jury found investors failed to prove Elon Musk derailed them with his tweet that he had "funding secured" to take Tesla private, per the WSJ. </li><li>The outcome vindicated Musk, who had argued that he didn't believe his tweet influenced Tesla's stock price.</li></ul>Elon Musk was reportedly vindicated late Friday Friday when a federal jury found that Tesla investors failed to prove that he derailed them with a 2018 tweet that he had <a href="https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1026872652290379776" target="_blank" rel="noopener">"funding secured"</a> to take the electric carmaker private, a deal that never materialized. The nine-person jury arrived at the conclusion shortly after deliberations started, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-found-not-liable-in-trial-over-tweets-proposing-to-take-tesla-private-11675464951?mod=breakingnews" target="_blank" rel="noopener">per a Wall Street Journal report.</a> The verdict was the culmination of a civil trial in San Francisco federal court, in which jurors heard testimony from high-profile witnesses <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-quotes-tesla-shareholder-funding-secured-lawsuit-trial-2023-1">including Musk himself</a>, along with Tesla's former chief financial officer Deepak Ahuja, and Musk's former chief of staff Sam Teller. Musk's defense <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-blames-saudi-investor-backpedaling-taking-tesla-private-trial-2023-1">highlighted his meeting</a> in July 2018 with Yasir Al-Rumayyan, an official in Saudi Arabia's Private Investment Fund, in which he said Al-Rumayyan had committed to helping to finance the deal. Those verbal assurances in part led him to tweet that he had "funding secured" for a take-private deal for Tesla, he told jurors last month. Nicholas Porritt of Levi &amp; Korsinsky LLP, an attorney for Tesla's shareholders, had challenged that narrative. In closing arguments Friday, Porritt told the jury that a conversation over financing, which he estimated could be to the tune of $60 billion, would have had to at least be put in writing, yet Musk took no notes. "Sometimes we substitute what we wished happened for what actually happened," Porritt argued in court. "That can happen when you're facing government investigations and lawsuits for billions of dollars."Musk's tweet, which he posted in August 2018, read, "Am considering taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured." In closing arguments, Musk's attorney, Alex Spiro of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &amp; Sullivan, argued that Musk's adversaries had painted him as a "fire-breathing dragon" and that the billionaire couldn't be faulted for being a "bad Tweeter."Before the trial, US District Judge Edward Chen had ruled that the billionaire's tweets should be considered "untrue," but that jurors had to decide if they were "material." In securities parlance, that meant jurors had to consider whether Musk's statements were significant enough to influence investors' trading choices.Musk's statements about the potential deal also drew <a href="https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the attention of securities regulators</a>, who in September 2018 extracted a $40 million penalty from Musk and the company, and said he could no longer helm Tesla's board. Porritt, the Tesla investors' attorney, had framed the stakes of the case in sweeping, existential terms, arguing that it came down to a question of whether regular investors could trust the public markets. "Whether it is the securities markets or a football game, rules must be fair and must be applied to everyone," he told the court on Friday. "And this case, ultimately, is about whether the rules that apply to everyone else should also apply to Elon Musk."

Elon Musk was reportedly cleared by a federal jury's verdict that his 'funding secured' tweet in 2018 didn't harm Tesla investors

<ul class="summary-list"><li>A man in New York sued <keyword id="12328650" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="canon" source="Orion">Canon</keyword>, saying the firm's All-in-One <keyword id="12328651" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="printers" source="Orion">printers</keyword> won't scan without printer ink.</li><li>David Leacraft filed a class-action complaint in federal court on Tuesday. </li></ul>A Queens man filed a class-action lawsuit against Canon, saying some of the <keyword id="11992983" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="electronics" source="Orion">electronics</keyword> giant's All-in-One printers won't scan documents unless they have ink cartridges installed. "In truth, the All-in-One Printers do not scan or fax documents when the devices have low or empty ink cartridges," said David Leacraft, the plaintiff, in a complaint filed Tuesday in US District Court in the Eastern District of New York. "Canon's advertising claims are false, misleading, and reasonably likely to deceive the public," Leacraft added. He purchased a "so-called all-in-one device," a Canon PIXMA MG2522, from Walmart in March 2021, he said in his complaint, which was first reported by <a href="https://www.action-intell.com/2021/10/13/class-action-claims-canon-pixma-units-wont-scan-or-fax-when-out-of-ink/">Actionable Intelligence</a>, a research firm."Plaintiff Leacraft would not have purchased the device or would not have paid as much for it had he known that he would have to maintain ink in the device in order to scan documents," the complaint said.Canon didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. The lawsuit said it expected the full list of plaintiffs to be more than 100 consumers. They'd seek more than $5 million in total damages and costs, it said. Leacraft's complaint collected similar gripes against the company from online forums, including Canon's community forum. Since at least 2015, customers have been posting about not being able to use their <keyword id="12328652" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="scanners" source="Orion">scanners</keyword> when their ink is low, the complaint said. In one response, a Canon representative said "there is no workaround for this," according to the complaint. The lawsuit accused Canon of breach of express warranty, unjust enrichment, and several New York laws. Leacraft is represented by Mark S. Reich and Courtney E. Maccarone, attorneys with Levi &amp; Korsinsky LLP.

Man files class-action lawsuit against Canon, seeking more than $5 million in damages over printers that won't scan documents when ink cartridges are low

<ul class="summary-list"><li><keyword id="882149" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Azealia-Banks">Azealia Banks</keyword> has been subpoenaed in a class action lawsuit concerning <keyword id="6355315" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="elon-musk">Elon Musk</keyword>'s tweets about taking <keyword id="107096" type="COMPANY" weightage="60" keywordseo="Tesla">Tesla</keyword> private at $420 per share. </li><li>"The first round of Elon Musk bulls--- was stressful enough," Banks said. "I don't have the bandwidth for another row with him." </li><li>Business Insider has also been subpoenaed. </li><li>In 2019, a judge granted the motion to serve document-preservation subpoenas against Banks and Business Insider, as well as Grimes, The New York Times, and Gizmodo. </li><li>It is unclear if Grimes, The New York Times, and Gizmodo have also been subpoenaed to produce documents. </li></ul>Azealia Banks has been subpoenaed in a lawsuit against Tesla and Elon Musk which, according to the complaint, is partly focused on what happened during a weekend the rapper spent at the Tesla CEO's home back in 2018. Banks confirmed to Business Insider that she was subpoenaed this week, after posting a photograph of the document on her Instagram. Business Insider has also received a subpoena in the case. "The first round of Elon Musk bulls--- was stressful enough," Banks told Business Insider in Instagram DM. "I don't have the bandwidth for another row with him." Banks is being subpoenaed by attorneys for plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit against Musk and Tesla. The lawsuit, filed by Tesla investors in 2018, alleges that Musk made false and misleading statements when he tweeted that funding was "secured" to take Tesla private at $420 a share in 2018. Banks visited one of Musk's Los Angeles homes the weekend after his $420 tweet, and told Business Insider at the time she saw the CEO "scrounging for investors to cover his ass after that tweet." Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">Rapper Azealia Banks claims she was at Elon Musk's house over the weekend as he was 'scrounging for investors'</a>Banks said on Thursday that the lawsuit is "not her issue," and that attorneys should look into the musician Grimes, Musk's girlfriend and the mother of his youngest child. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/court-grants-motion-subpoena-azealia-banks-grimes-preserve-information-tesla-case-2019-1">In January 2019,</a> the US District Court of Northern California <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/397612434/Docs?secret_password=ORL77obHU9xdg9g5FjE5">granted the motion</a> to serve document-preservation subpoenas against Banks and Grimes (whose real name is Claire Boucher) as well as Business Insider, The New York Times, and Gizmodo. "Ms. Boucher and Ms. Banks were in close contact with Mr. Musk before and after the tweet and are believed to be in possession of relevant evidence concerning Mr. Musk's motives," <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/court-grants-motion-subpoena-azealia-banks-grimes-preserve-information-tesla-case-2019-1">Adam M. Apton of Levi &amp; Korsinsky, the firm representing the investors, told Business Insider in January 2019.</a> "Business Insider also appears to have relevant evidence in light of its relationship with Ms. Banks."Business Insider confirmed Banks and Business Insider received a subpoena this week to produce documents and communication related to Musk's $420 tweet. Grimes, The New York Times, and Gizmodo did not respond to Business Insider's request to confirm that they were also subpoenaed to produce documents. Attorneys and representatives for Musk and Tesla also did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment.

Azealia Banks has been subpoenaed in the Elon Musk $420 'funding secured' class action lawsuit

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Jason Kempin/Getty ImagesA court granted the motion to serve subpoenas to Grimes in a lawsuit centered on Tesla CEO Elon Musk's&#xa0;"funding secured" tweet.</div></div></div><ul class="summary-list"><li>A court granted the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lawyer-suing-elon-musk-cites-potential-destruction-of-information-concern-2019-1">motion to serve subpoenas to Azealia Banks and Grimes</a> in a lawsuit centered on <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/tesla">Tesla</a> CEO<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/elon-musk"> Elon Musk's</a> "funding secured" tweet, asking them to preserve information.</li><li>Tesla investors claim that Grimes and Banks - who was <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">at one of Musk's properties soon after he posted the tweet</a>- could have information relevant to the case and want to preserve the evidence. </li><li>A lawyer representing the investors said the plans to serve Banks and Grimes, as well as Business Insider, The New York Times, and Gizmodo subpoenas to preserve evidence. </li></ul>A court has granted investors' motion to serve subpoenas to preserve documents to the rapper Azealia Banks and singer Grimes in a lawsuit against Tesla and Elon Musk, according to new court documents. On Tuesday, the US District Court of Northern California <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/397612434/Docs?secret_password=ORL77obHU9xdg9g5FjE5">granted the motion</a> to serve document preservation subpoenas against Banks, Grimes (whose real name is Claire Boucher), as well as Business Insider, The New York Times, and Gizmodo.Adam M. Apton of Levi &amp; Korsinsky, the firm representing the investors, told Business Insider that he plans to serve all five parties subpoenas to preserve evidence. The subpoenas will exclusively call for the parties to refrain from destroying certain documents, messages, and other potential evidence, as opposed to calling for them to provide the evidence to the court. The court denied investors' request to for propound document requests, or request further information.Plaintiffs are investors who are suing Tesla and Musk in a class-action lawsuit, claiming that Musk made false and misleading statements when he tweeted about plans to take the company private at $420 a share. These tweets, the complaint alleges, negatively impacted people who purchased Tesla stock soon after Musk tweeted about his plans, as they falsely believed that he had funding secured to take the company private.Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/lawyer-suing-elon-musk-cites-potential-destruction-of-information-concern-2019-1">Lawyers voice concerns about the potential for deleted information as rapper Azealia Banks gets pulled into a lawsuit against Elon Musk</a>Grimes was dating Musk at the time of the tweet, and recently accompanied the Tesla CEO on a trip to China. Banks, meanwhile, said she was staying at one of Musk's Los Angeles properties soon after he posted the tweet, and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">told Business Insider</a> she saw Musk "scrounging for investors" when she stayed at his house.In December, attorneys representing the investors led by Apton moved for permission to subpoena Banks and Grimes. The motion also proposes subpoenaing Business Insider - which interviewed Banks regarding her time at Musk's property - as well as Gizmodo and The New York Times, which interviewed Musk."Ms. Boucher and Ms. Banks were in close contact with Mr. Musk before and after the tweet and are believed to be in possession of relevant evidence concerning Mr. Musk's motives," Apton told Business Insider earlier in January. "Business Insider also appears to have relevant evidence in light of its relationship with Ms. Banks."The motion to serve subpoenas seeks to require the parties to preserve information, such as Twitter and Instagram messages, that could be relevant to the case. The filing argues messages posted on social media and shared via text message are "highly susceptible to deletion."While the court granted the motion, the filing also said that the "claim that Defendants have a practice of trying to silence critics is not well supported" and called Apton's claims that Banks may have been pressured to destroy evidence "largely speculative." Banks, Boucher, and Musk's lawyer did not respond to a request for comment. Tesla declined to comment.<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/intelligence/future-of-retail-ai?IR=T&amp;utm_source=businessinsider&amp;utm_medium=ctgr&amp;utm_term=ctgr_leadgen&amp;utm_content=ecommerce_ctgr_leadgen&amp;utm_campaign=ecommerce_ctgr_leadgen_future-of-retail-ai"></a> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-facts-ceo-doug-mcmillon-walton-family-2019-1">11 things you probably didn't know about Walmart</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

Court gives investors the okay to subpoena Azealia Banks and Grimes in lawsuit against Elon Musk and Tesla, asking them to preserve information

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Getty ImagesAzealia Banks and Elon Musk.</div></div></div><ul class="summary-list"><li>An attorney seeking to subpoena <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/azealia-banks">Azealia Banks</a> in a lawsuit centered on <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/tesla">Tesla</a> CEO <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/category/elon-musk">Elon Musk's </a>"funding secured" tweet is arguing that Musk's lawyers "seem to be pressuring" Banks to conceal and destroy information based on a now-deleted tweet by Banks. </li><li>Tesla investors claim that Banks - who was <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">at one of Musk's properties soon after he posted the tweet </a>- could have information relevant to the case. Their motion argues that information on social media is prone to being discarded inadvertently. </li><li>Banks said on Monday that she had told Musk's lawyers she did not want to testify in the case, a reversal from her prior excitement. </li><li>"If investors are looking to me to give them the iconic, succinct, truthful, legendary, dramatic-pop-culture-courthouse monologue ... they will absolutely get it," Banks told Business Insider last week. </li></ul>The battle to subpoena Azealia Banks in a lawsuit against Elon Musk and Tesla is heating up. Last week, Dean Kristy of Fenwick &amp; West, an attorney representing Musk, <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/396972626/Tesla-Case">filed an opposition</a> arguing against the allowance of a subpoena of Azealia Banks, as well as those of Grimes, Business Insider, Gizmodo, and The New York Times. Kristy argued that the motion for leave to serve preservation subpoenas was primarily an attempt to "sensationalize" proceedings.On Monday, Adam M. Apton of Levi &amp; Korsinsky, the firm representing the investors, fired back.Apton told Business Insider that the firm is seeking to subpoena Banks in part due to concerns that Musk, Tesla, or others connected to them could pressure the rapper to destroy information that could be relevant in the case. "Granting the motion would allow the plaintiffs to preserve this evidence and help provide a fair opportunity to take discovery for all parties," Apton said in an email on Monday. Citing a now-deleted tweet that Banks posted to her private Twitter account on Friday, Apton added a further concern that "lawyers seem to be pressuring Ms. Banks to conceal and/or destroy evidence." The tweet said that Musk's lawyers had previously taken her phone and suggested they tried tampering with information. Kristy and a representative for Musk did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment. Tesla declined to comment.The investors are suing Tesla and Musk in a class-action lawsuit, claiming that Musk made false and misleading statements when he tweeted about plans to take the company private at $420 a share. These tweets, the complaint alleges, negatively impacted people who purchased Tesla stock soon after Musk tweeted about his plans, as they falsely believed that he had funding secured to take the company private.Banks, for her part, told Business Insider on Monday that she was no longer interested in testifying in the case, a reversal from the previous excitement she expressed on the topic. Banks said that she had told Musk's lawyers about her reticence earlier in the day on Monday. "I never TRULY wanted to go to court, it was just something to joke about," she said in an Instagram DM. "I'm not getting paid to be a prosecutor so it's ultimately a waste of time for a musician to be in court." Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">Azealia Banks reveals why she thinks Elon Musk was right to settle with the SEC and who Tesla should tap as its new chairman</a><h2>The problems caused by 'funding secured'</h2><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Chris Carlson / Associated PressTesla CEO Elon Musk.</div></div></div>The motion asking the court for permission to serve preservation subpoenas is related to a lawsuit filed against Tesla and the company's CEO, Elon Musk, in August, after Musk tweeted that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">funding was "secured"</a> to take Tesla private at $420 a share. Banks was staying at one of Musk's Los Angeles properties soon after he posted the tweet, and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">told Business Insider</a> she saw Musk "scrounging for investors" when she stayed at his house.In December, attorneys representing the investors led by Apton moved for permission to subpoena Banks and Grimes, the singer and songwriter whose real name is Claire Boucher, who was dating Musk at the time. The motion also proposes subpoenaing Business Insider - which interviewed Banks regarding her time at Musk's property - as well as Gizmodo and The New York Times, which interviewed Musk.Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/azealia-banks-claims-to-be-at-elon-musks-house-as-he-sought-investors-2018-8">Rapper Azealia Banks claims she was at Elon Musk's house over the weekend as he was 'scrounging for investors'</a>"Ms. Boucher and Ms. Banks were in close contact with Mr. Musk before and after the tweet and are believed to be in possession of relevant evidence concerning Mr. Musk's motives," Apton told Business Insider on Monday. "Business Insider also appears to have relevant evidence in light of its relationship with Ms. Banks."The motion to serve subpoenas seeks to require the parties to preserve information, such as Twitter and Instagram messages, that could be relevant to the case. The filing argues messages posted on social media and shared via text message are "highly susceptible to deletion." On Friday, Banks had said she would be happy to share whatever information attorneys are seeking. "Since I will be under oath, I have no choice but to tell the exact same honest truth I told in the past - except this time it won't be vulgar," Banks said at the time. "The courthouse isn't the internet, so if investors are looking to me to give them the iconic, succinct, truthful, legendary, dramatic-pop-culture-courthouse monologue ... they will absolutely get it." However, on Monday, Banks told Business Insider she had changed her mind and told Musk's lawyers she no longer wished to testify. "I don't have any relevant information to add tbh," she said on Monday. "I'm not a stock analyst." Banks declined to say whether Musk's lawyers reached out to her over the weekend. She also declined to answer a question on the validity of Apton's concerns. Banks said she plans to wait until the court decides to grant or decline permission to serve the subpoenas to speak on the topic further. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/intelligence/future-of-retail-ai?IR=T&amp;utm_source=businessinsider&amp;utm_medium=ctgr&amp;utm_term=ctgr_leadgen&amp;utm_content=ecommerce_ctgr_leadgen&amp;utm_campaign=ecommerce_ctgr_leadgen_future-of-retail-ai"></a> <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/red-green-became-christmas-colors-santa-coke-coca-cola-2017-12">Why red and green are the colors of Christmas</a></h3> <div> </div> </div>

You Searched For "levi korsinsky" and got 8 results

Elon Musk cleared of fraud charges in 'Tesla funding secured' case

IANS

Elon Musk testifies that he thinks the number 420 has 'karma,' but he's not sure if it's 'good or bad'

Sindhu Sundar

Elon Musk says he is 'deeply appreciative' of the jury that cleared him in the Tesla trial, tweeting 'Thank goodness'

Sam Tabahriti

Elon Musk was reportedly cleared by a federal jury's verdict that his 'funding secured' tweet in 2018 didn't harm Tesla investors

Sindhu Sundar,Grace Kay

Man files class-action lawsuit against Canon, seeking more than $5 million in damages over printers that won't scan documents when ink cartridges are low

Kevin Shalvey

Azealia Banks has been subpoenaed in the Elon Musk $420 'funding secured' class action lawsuit

Kate Taylor

Court gives investors the okay to subpoena Azealia Banks and Grimes in lawsuit against Elon Musk and Tesla, asking them to preserve information

Kate Taylor

Lawyers voice concerns about deleted information as rapper Azealia Banks gets pulled into a lawsuit against Elon Musk

Kate Taylor

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides