OpenAI presses California court to dismiss shooting suits

OpenAI has asked a federal judge in California to dismiss lawsuits brought by survivors and families affected by the Tumbler Ridge mass shooting, arguing that British Columbia is the appropriate forum for claims arising from the February attack.

Motions filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California invoke the doctrine of forum non conveniens, which allows a court to decline a case when another available forum is substantially more suitable. OpenAI says British Columbia is both available and adequate because the shooting, the alleged injuries, most witnesses and much of the evidence are located there.

The company is seeking dismissal of actions among 37 federal lawsuits filed against OpenAI entities and chief executive Sam Altman. Seven cases were lodged in April by families of victims and an injured survivor, while another 30 complaints were filed in September by students, teachers, administrators and others affected by the attack.

OpenAI argues that the litigation is likely to require evidence from Canadian police, health-care providers, school officials and other British Columbia institutions that may be beyond the compulsory subpoena power of a California court. Its motion also says questions concerning firearms regulation, mental-health legislation and law-enforcement decisions before the shooting are tied closely to British Columbia law and public policy.

The company maintains that British Columbia has a stronger interest in resolving disputes stemming from an attack carried out there by a British Columbia resident against people in the province. It says California’s interest is more general, arising principally from OpenAI’s headquarters and business operations in San Francisco.

The plaintiffs contend California is an appropriate venue because OpenAI is headquartered there and because crucial decisions concerning the shooter’s ChatGPT account allegedly occurred within the company. Their complaints accuse OpenAI of negligence, product liability and other wrongdoing, alleging the company failed to alert authorities after identifying troubling activity linked to Jesse Van Rootselaar before the shooting.

Those allegations have not been tested in court. OpenAI rejects them and says it intends to contest the claims on their merits if the cases proceed. The company also argues that Altman should not face personal liability, saying he was not personally involved in the June 2025 review of the account or the decision not to refer it to Canadian law enforcement.

Van Rootselaar, 18, killed eight people, including six children, on February 10 before dying by suicide. The attack began at a family home and continued at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School. Court filings from the plaintiffs allege ChatGPT played a role in the period leading up to the killings and that OpenAI had earlier flagged an account connected to Van Rootselaar for activity involving violence.

OpenAI has previously said it disabled an account connected to the shooter in June 2025 for violating its policies. After the attack, the company said it had identified a second account believed to be associated with Van Rootselaar. It has said the earlier activity did not meet its threshold for an emergency referral to law enforcement at the time.

The Northern District of California related the initial seven cases in June and assigned them to US District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley, with Stacey v Altman designated as the lead action. The motions now before the court focus first on where the claims should be heard rather than whether OpenAI is legally responsible for the shooting.

A hearing on the dismissal request in the initial cases is scheduled for October 8 in San Francisco. The plaintiffs are expected to oppose moving the litigation, while OpenAI has said dismissal on forum grounds would not prevent claims from being pursued directly in British Columbia. The venue dispute precedes any judicial determination on the disputed allegations about ChatGPT, corporate decision-making or causation.